Proposal for:

S t . C r o i x C r o s s i n g P r o j e c t April 27, 2012 Final Design

Prepared for: Create Department of Transportation

Preserve Activate

Prepared by:

100 South Fifth Street Suite 1500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Technical Proposal Technical Proposal Technical

St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

• Perform a review of the bridge deck drainage system along with the hydraulic analysis of the and the entire construction project. Produce final design and details for a bridge drainage system balancing the visual elements of the box girder bridges with the external drainage pipes necessary to convey the drainage. • Deliver final construction plans by May 17, 2013 with a design that is developed to keep the construction cost within the overall project budget.

With our previous experience on similar projects, URS is very aware of and confident we will overcome all technical challenges associated with this project. These challenges include: 1) the understanding of complex load paths and force flows within the extradosed structure; 2) the difficulties in constructing large foundations in water; 3) engineering challenges related to the bridge drainage system; and 4) developing a plan set and construction scheme that is economical and bidder-friendly. However, perhaps the most critical challenge to achieving a successful project will be to maintain both budget and schedule while developing all design deliverables. This logistical aspect of the project will require, first and foremost, the experienced and talented project manager we have chosen to guide this team, Steve Stroh, PE, PhD. For this important project URS is making its most experienced bridge manager available. Steve has the distinction of being the Engineer of Record (EOR) of the first Extradosed Prestressed Bridge in the U.S., the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge and is also one of URS’ most experienced project managers for complex bridge projects. Steve will be supported by an experienced, committed and dedicated staff that brings unequaled experience in extradosed prestress bridge design and the other necessary expertise to assure a successful outcome for this project. We are excited about this opportunity to help MnDOT with the final design of this very important bridge project.

3. Work Plan and Project Approach and Methodology PROJECT COORDINATION Contract Administration, Management, Schedule: Steve Stroh, PE, PhD, and Mark Maves, PE, will spearhead the efforts of the St. Croix River Crossing project management team. This team brings a balance of local experience with MnDOT and national experience on similar complex bridge projects. Their first task will be the Project Execution Plan, which will be delivered 10 days after the Notice to Proceed (NTP). The Project Execution Plan (PXP), shared with MnDOT, will include an estimated sheet count by number and title and the anticipated percentage complete for particular sheets for each submittal. Additionally they will have worked proactively prior to the NTP to mobilize within URS and our project team, ALL the resources necessary for this challenging project, such that, there is no lag time between the NTP and productive work being accomplished. With upwards of 300 bridge engineers nationwide, and with the support of our nine subconsultants, URS will bring to bear a large group of committed and talented individuals with a common purpose of providing a quality product to MnDOT for the St. Croix River Crossing Project. URS has experience with successfully completing similar large scale “mega project” assignments in a very limited time frame. Examples include, the Kap Shui Mun Bridge in Hong Kong (a major cable stayed bridge designed and constructed in 3 years), and the ROC 52 Design-Build project in Rochester ($240 million reconstruction project designed in one year). The Gantt chart shown on the following page illustrates our proposed design schedule to perform the tasks listed in the RFPs Scope of Work.

Our URS experience with the preliminary, final and post design phases of the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, the first extradosed bridge in the United States and of similar complexity to the St. Croix River Bridge Project, provides MnDOT with valuable insights and a minimal learning curve related to extradosed bridge design. The same team leaders for the successful Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge project: Steve Stroh, Bob Anderson, Velvet Bridges, Richard Beaupre, Ed Bell, Scott Montgomery, and Daniel Mariscal also form the core team for the St. Croix River Crossing Project.

Peer Review Coordination: Through our peer review of MnDOT’s Lafayette Segmental Box Girder Design, URS is very familiar with the interface intended between the bridge designer and the peer reviewer. We will accommodate open and effective communication with the peer reviewer and work with them to resolve all comments in a timely manner. We understand the value of this very important

Page 2 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish June July August September October November December January February March April May June July August Septe E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B 1 Notice to Proceed (Assumed) 0 days Fri 6/1/12 Fri 6/1/12 6/1 2 Kick Off Meeting 0 days Thu 6/7/12 Thu 6/7/12 6/7 3 Design Review Meetings 260 days Sun 7/1/12 Mon 7/1/13 17 Design review teleconferences 240 days Sun 7/15/12 Sat 6/15/13 30 Project Managements Plan 10 days Fri 6/1/12 Thu 6/14/12 31 Document Security Plan 10 days Fri 6/1/12 Thu 6/14/12 32 Design and load rating criteria 10 days Fri 6/1/12 Thu 6/14/12 33 Receive peer review comments 0 days Thu 6/28/12 Thu 6/28/12 6/28 34 Final design and rating criteria 6 days Fri 6/29/12 Fri 7/6/12 35 Baseline P6 CPM 21 days Fri 6/1/12 Fri 6/29/12 36 Precast Vs. Cast-in-place investigation 15 days Fri 6/1/12 Thu 6/21/12 37 Review of Preliminary Plans/Propose Revisions 15 days Fri 6/1/12 Thu 6/21/12 38 CPM Updates 238 days Wed 8/1/12 Mon 7/1/13 51 Drainage Sys. Des. Rev. 1 day? Fri 6/1/12 Fri 6/1/12 52 Project Permits 241 days Mon 7/2/12 Mon 6/3/13 65 Concept Design (30% Plan) 80 days Fri 6/1/12 Thu 9/20/12 66 Concept design 30% Plan 56 days Fri 6/1/12 Fri 8/17/12 67 Quality Control 5 days Mon 8/6/12 Fri 8/10/12 68 Draft Engineers Cost Estimate 10 days Mon 8/6/12 Fri 8/17/12 69 Draft Foundation Recommendations 56 days Fri 6/1/12 Fri 8/17/12 70 Site Specific Wind Report 56 days Fri 6/1/12 Fri 8/17/12 71 Wind tunnel Section Model Study 46 days Fri 6/15/12 Fri 8/17/12 72 Vessel Collision Study 20 days Fri 6/15/12 Thu 7/12/12 73 Corrosion protection plan outline 20 days Mon 7/23/12 Fri 8/17/12 74 Aesthetic Lighting 20 days Fri 6/29/12 Thu 7/26/12 75 Constructibility Workshop 2 days Mon 8/27/12 Tue 8/28/12 76 Receive Peer Review of 30% 0 days Fri 8/31/12 Fri 8/31/12 8/31 77 SHPO Review 24 days Mon 8/20/12 Thu 9/20/12 78 Final 30% Plan 10 days Mon 9/3/12 Fri 9/14/12 79 Public Outreach 0 days Fri 8/24/12 Fri 8/24/12 8/24 80 Final Design (60% Plan) 114 days Mon 8/20/12 Thu 1/24/13 81 Draft Final Design 90 days Mon 8/20/12 Fri 12/21/12 82 Quality Control 5 days Mon 12/10/12 Fri 12/14/12 83 Preliminary Load Rating Results 15 days Mon 12/3/12 Fri 12/21/12 84 Constructibility Review 20 days Mon 11/26/12 Fri 12/21/12 85 Engineers Cost Estimate 10 days Mon 12/10/12 Fri 12/21/12 86 Receive Pile load test results (date TBD) 0 days Fri 9/14/12 Fri 9/14/12 9/14 87 Final Foundation Recommendations 20 days Fri 9/14/12 Thu 10/11/12 88 Redundancy Analysis Report Bridge 82045 30 days Mon 11/12/12 Fri 12/21/12 89 Wind Tunnel Aeroelastic Study 90 days Mon 8/20/12 Fri 12/21/12 90 Stay Vibration Study 60 days Mon 10/1/12 Fri 12/21/12 91 Draft Maintenance on Inspection Manual 30 days Mon 11/12/12 Fri 12/21/12 92 Draft Corrosion Protection Plan 30 days Mon 11/12/12 Fri 12/21/12 93 Contractor Information Meeting 0 days Fri 12/28/12 Fri 12/28/12 12/28 94 Receive comments on Draft Corrosion plan 0 days Fri 1/11/13 Fri 1/11/13 1/11 95 Receive Peer Review 60% 0 days Fri 1/18/13 Fri 1/18/13 1/18 96 Public Outreach 0 days Fri 12/28/12 Fri 12/28/12 12/28 97 SHPO Review 24 days Mon 12/24/12 Thu 1/24/13 98 Final Plan (95% Plan) 94 days Mon 12/24/12 Thu 5/2/13 99 Final Plan 70 days Mon 12/24/12 Fri 3/29/13 100 Quality Control 5 days Mon 3/18/13 Fri 3/22/13 101 Plan Constructibility Review 20 days Mon 3/4/13 Fri 3/29/13 102 Engineers cost estimate 10 days Mon 3/18/13 Fri 3/29/13 103 Final Maintenance an Inspection Manual 20 days Mon 3/4/13 Fri 3/29/13 104 Final corrosion protection plan 20 days Mon 1/14/13 Fri 2/8/13 105 Threat and Vulnerability Assessment 30 days Mon 2/18/13 Fri 3/29/13 106 Receive Peer Review Comments 0 days Fri 4/19/13 Fri 4/19/13 4/19 107 Public Outreach 0 days Fri 4/5/13 Fri 4/5/13 4/5 108 SHPO Review 24 days Mon 4/1/13 Thu 5/2/13 109 Certified Final Plans (100% Plan) 15 days Mon 4/22/13 Fri 5/10/13 110 Certified Final Plan (100%) 15 days Mon 4/22/13 Fri 5/10/13 111 Quality Control 3 days Mon 5/6/13 Wed 5/8/13 112 Cost Estimate Update 10 days Mon 4/29/13 Fri 5/10/13 113 Re-bid Meeting (Date TBD) 0 days Fri 5/24/13 Fri 5/24/13 5/24 114 Rating Manual 109 days Mon 4/1/13 Thu 8/29/13 115 Draft Rating Manual 66 days Mon 4/1/13 Mon 7/1/13 116 Receive Peer Review Comments 23 days Tue 7/2/13 Thu 8/1/13 117 Final Rating Manual (date TBD) 20 days Fri 8/2/13 Thu 8/29/13 118 Maint. And Inspection Manual 105 days Mon 4/1/13 Fri 8/23/13 119 Draft Manual 65 days Mon 4/1/13 Fri 6/28/13 120 Receive review comments 0 days Fri 7/26/13 Fri 7/26/13 7/26 121 Final Manual 20 days Mon 7/29/13 Fri 8/23/13

Project: St Croix Crossing Project - Fin Task Progress Summary External Tasks Deadline Date: Wed 4/25/12 Split Milestone Project Summary External Milestone

Page 1 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

task and the higher level of review required for this major structure. In addition to the formal peer reviews specified in the RFP, open dialogue will take place continuously between Steve and the peer review team. Weekly teleconferences proposed with MnDOT will also include the peer reviewer as needed. Open and frequent conversations to identify and solve issues in a timely manner will be the main goal of the peer review process.

Visual Quality: Currently, the fundamental components and guidelines related to the visual quality of the St. Croix River Crossing Project have already been established and refined in the VQM and its Addendums. To ensure adherence to the VQM, we intend to utilize David Barkin of Barkin Associates Architects LLC as the Visual Quality Coordinator (VQC) for this project with assistance from Steve Stroh, Project Manager and Richard Beaupre, Senior Design Engineer. David, Steve and Richard were all involved in the visual quality process for the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge project which included a high level of stakeholder involvement and attention to visual quality. Richard has substantial, unique experience in both structural design and visual quality coordination, and he is a long time member of the Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) bridge aesthetics committee. We understand that as a project proceeds through the final design, unresolved issues will need to be addressed and new issues may require supplementary assessments of visual quality. An example of the former, mentioned in the Bridge Design Scope of Work, is the drainage system for the main river crossing. Later visual quality assessments could be initiated by changes which may enhance components of the featured aesthetic or promote significant cost savings.

To accomplish a thoroughly vetted and effective visual quality process, we will address visual quality immediately following the NTP. Once issues affecting or changing visual quality are identified, Steve Stroh will establish a protocol to best suit their resolution. This protocol will follow the basic principles of the VQM, includes: 1) coordination meetings and workshops with the Project Team and the VQAC; 2) public outreach initiatives; 3) the effective development of a variety of drawings, sketches, renderings, and animations to communicate visual quality issues; and 4), developing cost/savings estimates. Steve, David and Richard are prepared and personally committed to serve, whatever role required, promoting a consistent and clear visual quality approach for the St. Croix project whether it is as an ambassador representing MnDOT at stakeholder meetings, and/or a role supporting MnDOT personnel.

Quality Management Plan and Program: URS will utilize a project specific Quality Management Plan (QMP) which complies with the applicable portions of the URS Corporate Quality Manual, as well as the ISO 9001:2008 (ISO 9001) family of standards. Overall quality management will be guided by Ed Bell, PE who will serve as the Quality Assurance Manager (QAM). Please see the Appendix for a draft version of our QMP.

Independent Design and Analysis (Quality Control Checking) - Scott Montgomery, PE will be the Lead Quality Control Check Engineer. He will lead a separate independent team of experienced bridge designers (including Brian Johnston, PE and Pati Theasler, PE, PhD) in the independent design and analysis check of the superstructure and substructure designs. URS will officially set up a firewall between the independent bridge checking team and the main bridge design team such that no interaction takes place other than quality checking meetings held to pass on information or to resolve design differences. The QC checking process will utilize a separate computer analysis program to assure MnDOT of an independent process.

Independent Technical Reviews – ITR’s will be performed, as assigned by Scott Montgomery, in accordance with our URS Project Execution Plan (PXP) and Quality Management Plan (QMP), by an individual with a substantial amount of relevant experience, and who additionally, is not involved directly in either the design or the production of the Contract Documents. Individuals assigned an ITR role will communicate extensively with the design leads; however, they report only to the Quality Control Check Engineer. This personnel designation allows the Reviewer to bring a fresh set of eyes and new, coherent understanding to the project design process. ITRs will be performed for all major design deliverables submitted to MnDOT. The audit process will ensure that all ITRs have been performed with each major submittal in a timely manner.

Page 4 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

Constructability Reviews - Constructability reviews will follow a broad based approach with active participation by our Project Team members Dave Jeakle, Infinity Engineering, for superstructure, Paul Silvestri, National Constructors Group, for substructure, and Ted Von Rosenvinge, GeoDesign for deep foundations. Moreover, we will seek input from MnDOT personnel and from industry resources (with prior authorization from MnDOT). As was very successful for the PHMB, we propose a two day constructability workshop at the 30% submittal to identify and address key issues related to constructability and provide a road map for the future direction of the project in the form of a report which will document the outcomes of the workshop.

Project Meetings: We plan that our Project Management Team, and key staff as applicable, will meet face-to-face with MnDOT on a monthly basis with teleconference calls being held on a weekly or bi-weekly basis, as needed. URS will provide agendas, such that the meetings are well planned and productive, and we will document outcomes and action items with meeting notes. Additionally, we will utilize workshops, for example the Constructability Review Workshop mentioned previously, to bring individuals together face-to-face to communicate and forge positive, problem-solving, working relationships that will inevitably pay dividends for the entire duration of the project. We are in full agreement with MnDOT’s prescribed Contractor’s Information Meeting.

Community Outreach/Public Involvement: Major public projects generate substantial public attention. Responding to information and media requests is always important, but the St. Croix Bridge project should reach further to create a successful dialogue with the public that helps project leadership understand residents' needs while helping residents understand the value and implementation of the project. We have enlisted Himle Rapp & Company of Minneapolis to advise URS and MnDOT on community outreach and public involvement during design activities, including six open houses near the 30%, 60% and 95% project stages (three in each state). We look forward to working with MnDOT and WisDOT officials to discuss comprehensive strategies that promote good faith and positive outcomes for this project.

BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS Bridge foundation design for the St. Croix Project will make use of the four preceding phases of subsurface investigation and will optimize design by utilizing the data collected from the 1995 drilled shaft load test program and the proposed drilled shaft and driven pile load test programs that MnDOT plans to conduct in the summer of 2012. The 1995 load test was completed on a different alignment and offset from the Mississippi River where the underlying Franconia sandstone is subjected to overburden soil stress. However, the data are still useful to final design as the borings completed near the proposed bridge alignment encountered similar soil and rock formations.

The new load testing, scheduled to be performed this year, will provide more precise information for the design of the new bridge due to the more precise location of the testing compared to the final bridge layout. The new testing and some of the pier locations will be located in areas without large amount of overburden soils compared to previous testing in 1995 that was performed in areas with large amounts of overburden. Tip testing from the 1995 test shaft program was inconclusive and the new program will likely provide more accurate end bearing information.

To optimize foundation design of the bridge, our design team will use similar principles, experiences and axial and lateral load test data performed on dozens of projects Braun Intertec has participated on within the complex but well-known geology throughout Minnesota. Of note, the I-35W Bridge reconstruction utilized O-cell axial testing; the Lowry Avenue Bridge included high-strain dynamic testing with the PDA for axial compression resistance and force-pulse Statnamic testing for axial and lateral loading; and the A.S King power plant in Oak Park Heights and Regions Hospital in St. Paul both used O-cell axial testing. Braun Intertec was the lead geotechnical engineer on all of the previously mentioned projects. In addition to Lead Geotech Jeff Gebhard’s extensive local experience with geology and design of large diameter drilled shafts and driven pipe pile, our team will have Tom Cooling, a URS senior geotechnical engineer with national experience from multiple bridge projects of a similar size and scale to provide an independent level of quality assurance to the project. Additionally Geo Design, led by Ted von Rosenvinge, will use his experience as the lead geotechnical engineer from the PHMB to peer review reports and confirm design decisions. Ted will also give input towards foundation constructability. Together, the

Page 5 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

foundation experience of the URS, Braun, and GeoDesign will maintain the highest standard to optimize the design of the bridge foundations.

To validate the foundation design (specifically the drilled shafts), construction means and methods and field verification are crucial to installation success. Our design team has worked very closely with design-build and other large contractors locally and nationally and gained a practical understanding of the design-construction relationships for large-diameter drilled shafts and driven pipe piles. In addition, our team has experience with many of the proposed non-destructive methods for evaluating driven piling and drilled shaft construction, including, but not limited to: high-strain dynamic pile testing, low-strain integrity testing, cross hole sonic logging, Sonic Calipers, and shaft inspection devices such as the Mini SID. We will apply both our expertise to design each foundation option while applying our expertise to develop a comprehensive quality control/assurance program to verify the design principles are implemented during foundation installation.

Interpretation of Geotechnical Data: The geotechnical and foundation engineering component of our technical approach for this project will address all the requirements of Section 5.0 of the Bridge Design Scope of Work included with the RFP. Based on our review of this document, it is our understanding that MnDOT will provide a report with geotechnical data and foundation design recommendations for each of the river piers, which will incorporate the results of previous and ongoing load testing programs. MnDOT will also provide a foundation recommendations report for the east and west approach onshore piers and abutments, including pile type, capacity and estimated lengths, as well as other geotechnical considerations.

Our preliminary review of the available data and information indicates that, for the purpose of the geotechnical and foundation studies, the project can be divided into three main areas: (1) the onshore area on the Minnesota side; (2) the St. Croix River area; and (3) the onshore area on the side. Subsurface conditions within each of these areas appear to be generally similar and, therefore, the same foundation type is likely to be used within each area. Available boring data indicate significant variations in subsurface conditions, particularly in the overburden soils, between the onshore Minnesota and Wisconsin sides. A preliminary foundation alternative study prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff in 2010 concluded that the preferred bridge foundations are driven piles for the onshore Minnesota spans, drilled shafts socketed into bedrock for the river piers, and either driven piles or drilled shafts for the onshore Wisconsin spans.

Pros and Cons of an Early Bridge Foundation Contract: URS has recent experience in creating a separate early foundation package for the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. The main bridge foundations were split into two parts to allow construction of half the superstructure. The use of separate contracts allowed successful bidding for each component of the contract and has simplified construction by reducing headroom restrictions associated with construction beneath the existing structure.

The pros and cons of an early bridge contract for the St. Croix River Bridge Project are presented in the following table:

St. Croix River Bridge Crossing - Pros and Cons of Early Bridge Foundation Contract Pros Cons Potential to reduce the overall project schedule. Could create additional mobilization and overhead management costs associated with separate contracts. Reduces individual contract size and associated There may be an overlap of work activities between bonding requirements. This may make attract the two contracts that creates added coordination more bidders and better competition. effort between contractors. Depending on when the second contract is A delay in the early bridge foundation contract could progressed, it could be insulated from any time negatively impact the second contract. delays associated with the first contract.

Page 6 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

Due to the shorter duration of the first and second Innovative means and methods creating construction contract, the project cost would be better efficiency for the second contract may not be protected from escalations in material and labor accommodated by the first contract. costs.

DESIGN AND LOAD RATING CRITERIA We understand the importance of sound design criteria in guiding a project. We have developed customized design criteria for all our major projects including the PHMB and the I-35W/TH62 Crosstown Project in Minneapolis. Additionally for the Crosstown Project, we developed a load rating criteria incorporating MnDOT’s legal and permit trucks and performed a load rating analysis for two structures in accordance with AASHTO Load Resistance Factor Ratings (LRFR). Since that time, and in accordance with AASHTO LRFR, URS has load rated numerous segmental box structures in the states of Indiana, North Carolina, and Michigan. We also have gained experience in LRFR as the Peer Reviewer for MnDOT’s Lafayette Bridge project. Therefore, we are very well versed in the complexities of AASHTO LRFR load rating procedures and the importance of load ratings to MnDOT. We will make them integral our part of the design process by including legal and permit trucks with our initial analysis and design. Thus, the bridges will rate properly when the final design is completed.

Key Components of Extradosed Design and Design Criteria: Bridge Articulation: The superstructure is presently detailed fixed (integral) with all seven tower locations. Bladed tower legs are provided however there will be large demands on the structure under creep, shrinkage and thermal loading. Our original design for the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge used a similar integral tower concept, but we had to abandon this during final design and use expansion bearings. If a change is desired, some options will include use of expansion bearings, possibly only on the outermost tower(s), jacking of the cantilevers at the mid-span closures before pouring the closure segments, or adding a mid-span hinge and expansion joint and one or more locations.

Transverse Design: The transverse design of the superstructure will require careful detailing in order to transfer the vertical shear from the interior web locations to the stay cables. For the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge we had a 100 foot wide single deck with four vertical webs and two inclined outer webs (see half section below). We were not able to design the cross section to function in transverse bending as a frame. The solution was to transfer the load from the outer vertical web to the stays with a stiff triangular diaphragm, and the inner web vertical shear was transferred with a draped post-tensioning tendon. We anticipate a similar issue with the interior web shears for the St. Croix Bridge.

Transverse load transfer scheme for the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge

Page 7 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

Tower to Deck Connection: The cross strut of the tower below deck level will have high moment, shear and torsional demands. Some of these will be from erection. The demands for the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge required a solid cross section for shear and torsion (and that bridge had an intermediate column between tower legs. We would expect a careful review and the demands and capacities of this element.

Areoelastic Response: Although the areoelastic wind performance of extradosed bridges are generally good in their complete state, they may be susceptible to critical stress conditions under buffeting wind during free cantilever erection. For the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, this was a controlling stress condition during erection. It is therefore important to obtain the erection stage wind analysis early in the design process to quantify structural demands.

Design Criteria: The design criteria shown in the Preliminary Bridge Plans appear to have a limited amount of information dedicated to construction engineering. In final design, we will verify that the contract documents establish load factors and stress limits for temporary works construction, additionally they will show the design assumptions for the weight of key construction elements. The final design will also expand upon the sequence and suggested means and methods assumed in the design of the bridge.

Precast Versus Cast-in-Place (CIP) Construction: Through our work on the I-35W Crosstown Project, URS was the EOR for the first precast segmental bridge constructed in the State of Minnesota. Likewise, our work on the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge in gives URS current experience with CIP construction with a form traveler system. We consider both projects have been very successful.

Extradosed bridges world-wide can and have been constructed by both methods. There are advantages and disadvantages to each erection method. The decision on which method to use in design, and also what latitude is given to Contractors in the contract documents, is best made by reviewing and considering the different options and weighing these against cost, schedule other factors. Some of the considerations are as follows:

• Precasting will require sufficient land to be identified within a reasonable distance of the site to set up a casting operation. There are costs associated with the casting operation that will need to be considered. The number of casting cells will need to consider the desired erection schedule, demand for segments, and storage capacity. CIP construction will require purpose made form travelers. Assuming each pair of deck progresses simultaneously, a minimum of four travelers would be required. This will set the erection schedule. In order to shorten the schedule, additional multiples of four travelers will be requires, with speed versus cost implications. The two erection methods will need to be compared based on either the optimal schedule, or maximum schedule and appropriate cost. • There will be different weather-related impacts for each of the two methods. Precast construction can proceed under heated enclosures, and the erection (in particular the epoxy curing) can likewise be accomplished with heated enclosures. The CIP form travelers can also be performed with heated enclosures and heated, insulated formwork. There are costs associated with each of these that must also be reconciled with schedule. • There are design consequences to the choice between precast and CIP. With a CIP design there is no steel between joints and a minimum compression must be maintained under all load cases. With cast-in-place there is mild steel at the joints and a level of tension can be tolerated. This means less post-tensioning for a CIP design. • Risks will factor into the decisions that are made. Some risks include potential procurement delays with differing equipment, consequences of equipment break downs, and consequences of weather delays.

URS understands that MnDOT desires a recommendation for precast versus CIP from the responder. We believe the magnitude of the project lends itself to the majority of the superstructure constructed by precast in combination with some parts constructed by CIP.

Page 8 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

Nonetheless, we believe that preliminary recommendation will be best finalized by coordinating a desired set of outcomes, such as any limitations or desires related to construction schedule, specific design limitations such as stress limits, and recognition of any environmental or site constraints on erection. Based on this set of constraints we will develop erection schemes for both a precast and CIP design, with corresponding cost, schedule and risk analysis. We believe a comprehensive set of inputs, not available at this proposal stage, will lead to URS’ final recommendation, which can be compared and evaluated with the recommendations of the peer reviewer.

PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW: Pre 30% Bridge Design: Prior to the 30% submittal there are several key activities and reviews that will take place. URS will co-chair (with MnDOT) the kick-off meeting to establish the communication protocols, review project issues, schedule, and review the project. URS will communicate its PXP, QMP and QA/QC procedures and submit them to the Department and all URS associates on the project. URS will develop the design and load rating criteria, and will collaboratively work with the MnDOT and the peer reviewer to optimize the design, resulting in a 2nd Concept Refinement Report (prepared by the URS).

Preliminary Plan Design Revisions and Optimization Opportunities: After collecting and reviewing available data, URS will give a fresh look to all design features of the Preliminary Bridge Plan. Because of the similarity of the St. Croix River Crossing to the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, we will be able to use our intimate knowledge and lessoned learned to optimize key areas such as:

Structure Depth: Even a small adjustment to structure depth can result in tremendous global cost savings without sacrificing the appearance characteristics of the bridge. URS will further evaluate adjusting the depth of the superstructure. The superstructure depth will be confirmed prior to conducting final wind tunnel testing.

Box Proportions: Using the Midas FEA program, we will confirm all transverse box dimensions with the goal of reducing material quantities and superstructure weigh. The graphical output capabilities for Midas FEA are exceptional and allow the user to identify “hot spot” and “cool spot” stress locations conveniently and efficiently.

Foundation Design: We acknowledge the considerable efforts undertaken by MnDOT related to the geotechnical evaluations to this point. To confirm the direction ahead and with the goal of minimizing both cost and risk, we will perform an optimization study with different sizes of pile and drilled shafts for each bridge. In conjunction with the optimization study, we will undertake global research to reveal the most feasibly techniques for the construction of the cofferdams and associated cofferdam seals.

Design Alternatives: To encourage a more competitive and efficient bidding process, alternative bid packages could be developed for numerous items. These alternatives could include: 1) drilled shaft vs. driven pile; 2) precast vs. or cast-in-place for transverse struts; and 3) cofferdam seal options.

Life Cycle Analysis: The St. Croix River Bridge will be maintained by MnDOT at least 100 years after it is constructed. Therefore, a long term view related to components and maintenance items could ultimately provide MnDOT with a better product and lowest life cycle costs. For example, the use of LED lighting versus halogen or high pressure sodium fixtures mentioned in the 1st Concept Refinement Report. This is one of many items that could be refined as final design progresses. We propose that items of merit will be identified in the design criteria for further study. As stated previously, the outcome of our optimization reviews will be included in a 2nd Concept Refinement Report.

Strategy for Successful Implementation of Environmental and Hydraulic Requirements: Successful implementation of environmental and hydraulics design will balance multiple project objectives including bridge aesthetics, efficient drainage collection/conveyance design, and constructability considerations. While working closely with the bridge designer in an interactive and iterative work process, we will select drainage collection and conveyance systems that best deliver stormwater drainage to two pond locations for detention and water quality treatment. The design will incorporate the bridge design type (CIP or precast segmental), plan and profile, pier location, and final bridge fascia treatment. A thorough review of the preliminary drainage design report, February 2012

Page 9 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

will form the basis of the initial design which may be refined for maintainability, accessibility for inspection, material stability for pipes and conveyance system, constructability, and aesthetics are considered.

Methodologies used for drainage analysis include: P8 for water quality, XPSWMM for peak flow and pipe conveyance for design stormwater events and MPCA design guide for infiltration basin volumes. For drop shaft structure analysis, manufacturer’s predictive model will be checked for turbulence that may reduce manhole capacity.

Drainage System Review for Visual Quality: Because of the large drainage pipes needed for water conveyance, we foresee a significant effort to integrate and mitigate their appearance in accord with the VQM. URS has many computer imaging tools at our disposal to render proposals quickly and accurately. We also see the structural significance of the drainage system, in terms of weight and holes in the main boxes necessary for piped water flow. Once a technical solution is achieved, Steve Stroh and David Barkin will make sure that the visual aspects are also satisfied by the preferred drainage option.

Bridge Fixity Study: In coordination with other tasks, we will prioritize the analysis of the bridge with different locations and conditions for expansion joints. Foundation forces and structural behavior in general will be significantly affected by the outcome of this study. Thus, it is important assess and report the viability of different options related to bridge articulation at the very first phase of project. We will use the initial geotechnical information available from MnDOT to facilitate preliminary modeling efforts.

Risk Management: URS will use the Crave Study completed in 2008 and the Value Engineering recommendations described in the Approval Form as the starting points for a risk management program. We acknowledge that many risks can be managed or eliminated through a coordinated program. Additionally, opportunities (negative risks) can also be exploited. We list the following items associated with risk and risk management.

Mitigation of Time Risks: • Present plans which allow construction on multiple fronts in case delays occur at one front. • Use precast components which allow more controlled construction conditions.

Mitigation of Contractor Risks: • Comprehensive pre-bid construction meeting to communicate key features, answer questions, and facilitate competitive bidding. • Employing design / construction features that allow “wiggle room” and the build-out of construction tolerances. o Particularly related to Bridge Scoping Item 6.3c, we have very recent experience with the jacking and the in-place rehabilitation of the mid-span bearings for the Dames Point Bridge in Jacksonville, Florida. We observed the required jacking to produce 1 inch of moment was almost double of what was predicted analytically. Thus, while feasible to jack apart cable stayed structures, the actual loading behavior is difficult to assess and would need a very well thought out approach. One idea we propose is the use of accurate GPS measuring of permanent monuments embedded in the structure. Thus, the jacking could be made, not at predetermined time intervals, but by indication of structural movement assessed during routine bridge inspections. Further, the Contractor could be asked to perform jacking steps during construction and these results could be put into place in a maintenance manual. o The potential for mid-span jacking can be a critical design concern. For the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, the jacking forces for span closures had a poor correlation between measured forces and actual displacements, requiring the designers to bracket acceptable ranges of jacking loads. In order to improve confidence in the forces imparted to the structure by the jacking, a construction phase instrumented load monitoring of the drilled shafts can be implemented, giving a measured confirmation between the mid-span jacking and the forced imparted on the foundations, including the actual soil structure response. Phase II of foundation monitoring of the I-35 W bridge included such instrumentation, where MnDOT, FHWA and the University of South Florida (USF) Geotechnical Research Group teamed to provide real-time monitoring of the construction loads transmitted to the

Page 10 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

foundations. A similar approach can be used to provide verification of the jacking load. We have included Gray Mullins, P.E., PhD, of USF on our team to assist with the design and specification of such a system, if chosen as a design option. o Related to Bridge Scoping Item 6.4 in the RFP, our previously mentioned work with WisDOT gives URS the tools (Midas FEA) and the expertise to perform the redundancy evaluations for the stays and struts which use global FEA models to assess structural behavior. • During construction, include a parallel, companion model by the designer to verify the loads and deformations of the construction model. • Develop solutions which produce superior cofferdam seals.

Mitigation of Construction Risks for Drilled Shafts: • Construction of one or more technique shafts. • Specific use of rotator / vibrator equipment to advance drilled shaft casing. • Self-consolidating concrete with pea sized aggregate for drilled shafts. • Use 90 ksi longitudinal reinforcing in shafts to reduce congestion. • Mini-SID for shaft inspections. • Crosshole sonic logging for shaft inspections. • Pressure grouting for assurance of drilled shaft tip capacity.

PLAN PREPARATION: Bridge Design: Plan preparation will follow in parallel with the design and analysis process per the Project Execution Plan. We will sequence plan prep with major milestones and the interim delivery of reports creating an efficient process with minimal rework. The design process will focus upon the preparation of the Contract Documents. We do not intend to prepare segment Shop Drawings, which are used by the Contractor during the post bid. This is because the segment shop drawings rely on information dependent upon the Contractor’s chosen means and methods, such as erection scheme, anchorages for construction equipment, and the geometry control plan; which are developed after the project is awarded.

Structural Modeling Techniques: The following describes the computer programs and methodologies that will be used to for structural modeling.

Time dependent longitudinal analysis: Daniel Mariscal, Senior Bridge Engineer and chief analyst will use RM Bridge, supported by Bentley, as the primary analysis tool for static cases including gravity loads (dead, live and constructio), thermal loads, primary and secondary loads due to post-tensioning, and static equivalent loads for wind and vessel collision. RM Bridge is a sophisticated, industry proven, 3- dimensional space frame program that will accommodate the time dependent effects of concrete creep and shrinkage and generates robust graphical and text outputs. Daniel has over 15 years of experience in using RM Bridge and its predecessors. Foundations will be modeled with spines and outrigger elements to capture the response of the individual piles or drilled shafts. The piles or shafts will be of representative length and stiffness to accurately represent soil-structure interaction and non-linear load deformation response of the system, i.e., a secant modulus resultant derived from by an iterative collaborative approach with the use of fbPier discussed below. We envision three analysis models will be necessary to address no scour, half scour, and full scour conditions.

We will use the Midas Civil program as an independent check model against RM Bridge. Midas Civil is also a 3-dimensional space frame program that can accommodate concrete time dependent effects. This model will be created independently by the experienced design team of Brian Johnston and Pati Thaesler. Together, they will build an independent model from the ground up and compare results for various applied loads, including unit loads, with the primary RM Bridge model.

Page 11 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

General longitudinal static and dynamic analysis: Our primary tool for general purpose space frame analysis and small scale shell model finite element analysis is the gtStrudl program. We have been using gtStrudl for over 30 years and have a tremendous amount of experience with its function and capabilities. We will create a dynamic model of the entire bridge for use with the wind aeroelastic studies, we will use a consistent node numbering and location to allow a direct comparison of the gtStrudl results with our other global models. Unit loads and density load features of gtStrudl will allow cross checking of output with the RM Bridge and Midas Civil models mentioned previously. We will use a quasi-static approach to use the results from the aeroelastic wind tunnel evaluations to develop static loads summed with an appropriate combination method (such as SRSS or CQC). Thus, the wind loads are then combined with other loads per the usual AASHTO load groups.

Superstructure transverse analysis: The complex load path distribution with a wide, twin box structural system demands the use of sophisticated FEA analysis. We will use the Midas FEA program to perform the following analyses: 1) the gravity load distribution, primarily to determine shear demands to the interior and exterior webs; and 2), the transverse force and stress effects, and optimization, of the slabs and webs of the box system. We expect that linear elastic brick elements will be used to develop a comprehensive, computationally efficient model. Midas FEA has the capability for linear and non-linear analysis, the direct incorporation of the primary and secondary effects of post-tensioning, and sequencing of load cases for staged construction. We have experience in using Midas FEA for the PHMB and for a recent steel girder redundancy study performed on twin box girder systems for the WisDOT. For the later, we used the linear and non-linear features of Midas FEA to accurately model the response of a fractured girder system under dead , live load, and the release of impulse energy due to fracture. We propose a similar approach, with Midas FEA and again using both linear and non-linear analysis (if applicable), that can be used to assess the redundancy of the St. Croix River Crossing for the effect of the loss of any one cable or the fracture of one strut.

Foundation and soil/structure analysis: To model the non-linear behavior of foundation soil-structure interaction, we will use the fbPier program. fbPier originated approximately 20 years ago as a public domain software package developed with the support of the Florida Department of Transportation (with assistance of URS during beta testing) and is now maintained by the University of Florida – Bridge Software Institute. fbPier was first used primarily for extreme load cases produced by vessel collision; however, it has since evolved into a more general purpose program with enhanced features for soil and rock modeling, load vs. deformation response for a variety of pile and drilled shaft types, and more complete modeling tools. Our extensive experience with fbPier gives URS the capability to quickly and accurately model the foundation elements and compare program output with test results. With fbPier, we are able to take advantage of capacity enhancements provided by the drilled shaft casings for both confinement of the concrete core and for flexural response.

Local detail analysis: Concrete components such as the deck level stay cable anchorages, diaphragms, anchorage regions, and discontinuities and openings are often checked with the strut-and-tie methodology. We have used the public domain software CAST (Computer Aided Strut-and-Tie developed at the University of Illinois-Champaign Urbana) as an effective tool when analyzing and designing these very important detail regions. CAST provides a convenient user interface and graphical output. Bob Anderson, Lead Designer – Substructure, is a voting member or ACI’s Shear and Torsion and Strut-and-Tie Committees and will provide the most current philosophies towards the design of complex detail elements which will be many for the St. Croix River Crossing.

Visual Quality Coordination: Our plans will include architectural drawings which will communicate features such as textures, colors, paint schemes, pedestrian handrails, unique and project wide structural treatments. David Barkin and Richard Beaupre will work together to make sure the architectural / structural design processes are well coordinated.

Security Assessment: URS will investigate and develop a Threat and Vulnerability Assessment using in-house resources. We will identify potential security threats and implement appropriate countermeasures following the 4 “D’s”: Deter; Deny; Detect; and, Defend security enhancements, with Defend always required, as described in the Bridge Design Scope of Work and current FHWA recommendations.

Page 12 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

Lighting and Electrical Engineering: We recognize the significant effort required for electrical systems which may include power and conduits for: • Interior Lighting and Outlets for future Inspection and • Lighting Protection and Other Grounding Systems Maintenance • Security /Anti-Intrusion Systems • Aesthetic Lighting • Navigation Lighting • Roadway Lighting • Aviation Lighting

The coordination required between the structural and electrical disciplines will be critical.

CONCEPT DESIGN (30% PLAN) The 30% plan submittal will communicate a design concept that conforms with: the preliminary plan (revised by any approved changes summarized in the Concept Refinement Report), the VQM, and design criteria and specifications, and a list of tentative special provisions. It is critical that the basic structural system is thoroughly vetted at this stage, as not to cause costly re-work later. The 30% concept phase defines the limits and sizes of the structure and also includes the submittal of the following design documents:

Draft Version – Final Foundation Recommendations: We list following detailed steps of a holistic approach pertaining to the geotechnical component of the project:

• Review available geologic, geotechnical, hydrological, and environmental data, as well as preliminary bridge design information and prepared drawings, and MnDOT reports with preliminary foundation design recommendations. As part of this review, we will evaluate the adequacy of the available geotechnical information and develop recommendations for a supplemental investigation if required. • Review previous foundation alternative studies and perform an independent evaluation of the most viable foundation type(s) within each segment of the river crossing, including technical (design and construction), cost, and environmental considerations. Develop final recommendations on preferred foundation types. • Develop in draft form, final design and construction recommendations for the selected foundation types based on available data and studies performed by MnDOT, as well our own independent analyses and evaluations. Various pile and drilled shaft diameters will be considered to arrive to the most cost effective foundation system, in addition to meeting other project requirements. • Drilled shaft design recommendations will take into account load transfer and strain compatibility considerations (i.e. end bearing contribution), impact of construction methods on shaft capacity, and potential problems during shaft construction. Shaft capacity recommendations will also take into account the highly variable nature of the bedrock underlying the site and will consider the amount and quality of available rock test data as well as the number of load tests. Depending on the adequacy of the data, we will evaluate and provide recommendations on the need for static load testing during construction. • Driven pile design recommendations will take into account the depth variability of competent bearing strata, drivability issues, and minimum penetration requirements particularly in the very dense sands on the Wisconsin side. Depending on the results of previous studies and available load test data, both open and close ended pipe piles, as well as HP sections will be considered. • Both pile and drilled shaft capacity recommendations will consider group effects as appropriate. • Review previous studies and load test data on the lateral response of piles and drilled shafts, and perform independent analyses, as necessary, to develop final geotechnical parameters for analysis of the structure response to lateral loading. • Review bridge hydraulics data and scour depth predictions. Develop pile and/or drilled shaft capacity recommendations with scour considerations, as appropriate. • Develop final construction recommendations for piles and drilled shafts. Develop minimum testing requirement for each foundation type, including static load testing if considered necessary.

Page 13 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

• Develop geotechnical recommendations for construction of approach embankments based on previous studies of embankment settlement and slope stability, as well as our own independent analyses. Evaluate downdrag effects on abutment piles and shafts as appropriate. • The geotechnical and foundation engineering work will be performed in accordance with the appropriate design standards and governing documents listed in Section 4.0 of the SOW. We will also evaluate the need for any geotechnical or foundation related Technical Special Provision.

The outcome to these efforts will be the submittal of a Draft Version of the Final Foundation Recommendations for St. Croix River Crossing Project.

Site Specific Wind Report and Wind Model Sectional Model Study: At the 30% stage we will submit the draft wind engineering study for comment. This document, authored by Jon Raggett of West Wind Laboratory, will include the site specific wind design recommendations report, and preliminary section model testing results. As noted below, at 60% the final wind engineering study, the cable vibration study, and the aeroelastic model wind tunnel testing will be provided.

Vessel Collision Study: This study will include a synthesis of river traffic and recommended vessel collision design loadings and potential countermeasures. This will be self performed by URS. URS has provided dozens of vessel collision studies, most recently for Ironton Russell cable stayed bridge. URS was also one of the original authors of the “AASHTO Guide Specification of and Commentary for the Vessel Collision Design of Highway Bridges” and is fully familiar with these provisions.

Redundancy Analysis Report: This report will describe and discuss the evaluations taken to ascertain the effects due to the loss of a single stay cables (per PTI recommendations) or the loss of a cross strut connection the boxes. This report will also discuss other non-redundant components as applicable.

Corrosion Protection Plan Outline: The corrosion protection plan outline will provide the basis for a comprehensive document that includes recommendations for mix designs and admixtures, reinforcing types, post-tensioning including grouts, multi-layer protection systems, and possible electrical isolation systems, cover requirements, materials for ancillary component such as ladders, platforms, doors and anchor bolts, and sacrificial overlays. The corrosion protection plan may include the use of structural monitoring equipment to measure the progression of chlorides through concrete.

Aesthetic Lighting Concept Report: This report, authored by Faith Baum, will include visualizations and technical data related the design development of the aesthetic lighting concept. This report will allow for the engineering design of the electrical systems for this lighting.

Constructability Review Workshop: As discussed previously, URS will chair a two-day constructability workshop at the 30% to reach consensus regarding all major issues affecting the constructability of the bridges. The outcome of this workshop and other associated efforts will be documented in a Constructability Report submitted with the 60% Submittal.

FINAL DESIGN (60% PLAN) At the 60% plan submittal, the plans will show reinforcing and post-tensioning for all major elements. Special provisions will submitted in draft form for comment. The following reports and studies will be submitted: • Final Foundation Recommendations • Final Aesthetic Lighting Concept Report • Final Site Specific Wind Report and • Draft Constructability Review Report Wind Model Sectional Model Study and Summary of Constructability • Final Vessel Collision Study Review Workshop • Final Redundancy Analysis Report

Page 14 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

• Draft Maintenance and Inspection • Draft Threat and Vulnerability Manual Assessment • Draft Corrosion Protection Study At the 60% plan submittal, the design of the majority of key elements will be substantially complete.

FINAL DESIGN (95% PLAN) The 95% plan submittal will give MnDOT a nearly complete version of all project deliverables and Contract Documents. We envision only minor comments will need to be addressed to transition these documents to the Certified Final Plans. In addition, the following documents (previously discussed) will be submitted in their final form. • Final Maintenance and Inspection Manual • Corrosion Protection Plan • Threat and Vulnerability Assessment • Any remaining reports revised to incorporate final comments. • Resolution of all remaining peer review comments. It will be through the collective efforts of MnDOT and the URS Project Team that we successfully meet this milestone on schedule.

LOAD RATING ANALYSIS We emphasize that the load rating analysis will be made an integral part of the final bridge design and shall not be put together as an afterthought. The preapproved summary load rating table will be clear and concise and include rating factors, as appropriate, for inventory and operating conditions at service and strength limit states.

SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND COST ESTIMATES Mark Maves has been designated the Contracts Specialist for this project. Mark will work with the project team to create Special Provisions that follow MnDOT’s format and are coordinated with MnDOT’s Standard Specifications. Mark will be responsible for the list of pay items necessary for bidding. Mark with work with David Cabage to assemble cost estimates at the 30%, 60%, 95% and 100% plan submittals. These estimates will be based on unit costs and estimates of unit prices. We will also use varying decreasing contingency factors as the design progresses. We will ask Paul Silvestri, NCG, to perform a peer review of each cost estimate using “Contractor Style” estimating techniques. Using these cost estimating procedures, we were able to provide Connecticut DOT an Engineer’s Cost Estimate within 2% of the bid price for the main span contract of the PHMB.

PROJECT PERMITS Craig Johnson will be responsible for assisting MnDOT with the permitting. He will furnish all the necessary data and details to obtain applicable project permits and will respond to all water resources issues that occur during construction. This work will begin immediately after NTP requiring assistance in obtaining the Army Corps and MPCA permits.

DELIVERABLES URS will provide the following deliverables as listed in the RFP Scope of Work: • Office space at local URS office for • 95% Plan (Items per RFP Section 14.1.7) MnDOT/WisDOT staff • Final Certified Plan • Design and Load Rating Criteria • Corrosion Protection Plan • Primavera P6 Schedule • Threat and Vulnerability Assessment • Drainage System Design Review • Wind Engineering Study Report • Foundations Recommendations • Final Certified Bridge Plan • 30% Plan (Items per RFP Section 14.1.4) • Load Rating Manual • 60% Plan (Items per RFP Section 14.1.6) • Bridge Maintenance and Inspection Manual

Page 15 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

4. Background and Experience URS is uniquely qualified for this assignment: • URS designed the first extradosed prestressed bridge in the United States, the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, • URS has extensive experience in cable stayed bridge design, with experience on more than 20 cable stayed bridge designs, • URS has designed over 3 million square feet (and growing) of segmental concrete box girder bridges, • URS has served as final design engineer for numerous complex segmental and cable stayed bridge projects, and • URS is committing the same staff that worked on many of the following projects.

Examples of projects supporting this experience include:

Preliminary and Final Design for Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, New Haven, Connecticut: URS was responsible for concept development, preliminary design, final design and construction phase support for Contracts B1 and B of this project which included the first extradosed prestressed bridge in the United States. The main river bridge is a three span extradosed bridge with a 515 foot main span. The superstructure is a cast-in-place concrete box girder erected balanced cantilever using a form traveler. Twin decks each carry 5 lanes plus a tapering auxiliary lane. URS also prepared a final design for a composite steel deck extradosed bridge that was bid competitively with the concrete alternate. The concrete alternate was selected for the construction by lower cost. The northbound deck is nearing completion and should be open to traffic early summer of 2012. As part of the design URS developed vessel impact loading, prepared a corrosion analysis, prepared load rating calculations and developed an inspection and maintenance manual. The southbound bridge is scheduled for a summer 2015 completion. Key staff involved with the project include Steve Stroh, Bob Anderson, Velvet Bridges, Daniel Marsical, Richard Beaupre, David Barkin, Ted von Rosenvinge, Ed Bell, Scott Montgomery, Jon Raggett, and Paul Silvestri. 1. URS’ initial contract for this project included the bridge type study. That contract was supplemented to provide preliminary design, final design for a steel and concrete extradosed bridge alternative, bid support services and construction phase services. All contracts have been completed within their contract limits. 2. URS has met all schedule milestones and deadlines for this project. 3. URS has completed this complex project with a high degree of competence. Client contact is Richard B Armstrong, Principal Engineer – Consultant Design, State of Connecticut Department of Transportation, Tel 860.594.3191, Email [email protected]

Preliminary and Final Design for Ironton Russell Bridge, Ohio DOT: URS provided preliminary and final design services for this concrete cable stayed bridge with a 900 foot main span. Design included vessel impact considerations, ice effects on cables, foundation design in the Ohio River and considering a wide range of river flood stages, Coast guard permitting, including a unique use of navigation simulations using river pilots and the Seaman’s Church Institute training facility in Paducah, KY in order to set the tower locations with respect to the navigation channel. URS provided load rating calculations. Coordination was required for the two states involved Ohio and Kentucky. URS is presently providing construction phase services for this project. Key staff included: Steve Stroh, Bob Anderson, Velvet Bridges, David Jeakle,

Daniel Mariscal, Robert Gaskins, Brian Johnston, and Jon Raggett. 1. URS completed this assignment within the original budget 2. URS complied with all project deadlines and milestones

Page 16 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

3. URS has provided all services for this project with a high degree of proficiency. Client contact: Mr. Timothy J. Keller , P.E., Administrator, Office of , Ohio Department of Transportation, Tel. 614.466.2463, Email [email protected]

Preliminary and Final Design for Bridge of Honor (Pomeroy Mason Bridge), Ohio DOT: URS provided concept development, preliminary design, final design and construction phase services for this concrete cable stayed bridge with a 675 foot main span. Project involved design/construction of foundations in the Ohio River, consideration of vessel collision design, site aesthetics and community involvement program. At completion of construction, URS provided a detailed maintenance and inspection manual and load rating calculations. The project involved two-state coordination between Ohio and West Virginia. This project was awarded the 2011 ASBI bridge award of excellence. Key Staff includes Steve Stroh, Velvet Bridges, and Richard Beaupre, David Jeakle, and Jon Raggett. 1. URS completed this assignment within the original budget 2. URS complied with all project deadlines and milestones 3. URS has provided all services for this project with a high degree of proficiency. Client contact: Mr. Timothy J. Keller , P.E., Administrator, Office of Structural Engineering, Ohio Department of Transportation, Tel. 614.466.2463, Email [email protected]

I-35W/TH62 Crosstown Commons, Minneapolis, MN URS was responsible for the final design and construction plans for two segmental concrete box girder bridges at the reconstruction of the Crosstown Commons interchange in Minneapolis, MN. URS also developed a Load and Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) Manual for MnDOT’s use in rating permit vehicles over the new structures. Key staff included: Steve Stroh, Bob Anderson, Velvet Bridges, David Jeakle and Mark Maves. 1. URS completed this assignment within the original budget 2. URS complied with all project deadlines and milestones 3. “URS provided expert input on precast segmental bridges during the peer review process and helped guide the process through some difficult issues. The project was delivered within project budget which is very important to MnDOT” – Keith Molnau. Keith Molnau , MnDOT, Bridge Office, 3485 Hadley Ave N, Oakdale, MN 55128, Phone - 651 - 651-366-4520, [email protected]

5. Key Personnel / Prestressed Extradosed Bridge Design Experience Steve Stroh, PE and PhD – Project Manager, Extradosed Span Lead: Dr. Stroh has worked on more than 20 cable stayed bridges, in Project Manager and/or Lead Designer roles. His training includes a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering, awarded based on his dissertation “On the Development of the Extradosed Bridge Concept”, which makes Steve uniquely qualified for this assignment. He traveled to Japan in 2001 as part of a FHWA team to study extradosed bridge technology in Japan. He is a licensed engineer in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Steve is experienced in efficiently identifying and resolving differences, whether technical design issues, philosophical design approaches, risk issues, cost issues or competing interests. He has served as project manager for a number of highly complex projects, including most recently the development of a new crossing of the Panama Canal on the Atlantic side, involving study of tunnels, cable stayed bridges, vessel impact/grounding, environmental and socioeconomic considerations, visual impacts and a wide range of competing interests. His 38 years of experience in bridge design allows him to bring a broad range of solutions to the problems that will be encountered on this project. Steve will also serve as the Lead Bridge Designer for the extradosed structure. He was the EOR for the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, the first and only extradosed bridge designed and under construction in the United States. Steve has also been the EOR for several cable stayed bridges and segmental concrete bridges, most recently the Ironton Russell Bridge over the Ohio River, a concrete cable stayed bridge with a 900 foot main span. He was awarded the American Segmental Bridge Institute Leadership Award in 2006 for his contributions to segmental and extradosed prestressed bridges. Dr. Stroh

Page 17 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

is fully committed to this project. This assignment requires, and Dr. Stroh is committed to, 100% availability for this project. Education: BSCE, MSCE , and PhD - University of South Florida

Bob Anderson, PE – Substructure Design Lead: Bob has 29 years of engineering experience and the majority of his career has been involved the preliminary and final design of major water crossings including segmental concrete and long-span cable-stayed types. Through his work on many projects, Bob has gained significant experience related to foundations and large drilled shaft design, construction, and testing Bob is a licensed engineer in MN and has “hands-on” experience with MnDOT procedures and methods for design and plan production. Bob was the Lead Designer on these relevant bridge design projects: Preliminary and Final Design of the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, New Haven, CT; Preliminary Design - Dresbach Bridge at I-90 over the Mississippi River, Dresbach, MN; Final Design of the U.S. Grant Bridge, Portsmith, OH; Preliminary and Final Design of the Kap Shui Mun Bridge, Hong Kong; and, Final Design of the I-35W/TH 62 Crosstown, Minneapolis, MN. Education: BSCE – South Dakota State University, MSE - University of at Austin

Velvet Bridges, PE – Concrete Box Superstructure Design Lead: Velvet has 23 years of experience mainly in the Design and Analysis of pre-tensioned and post-tensioned concrete, and cable supported bridges. She worked on the final design of the concrete alternate and the independent longitudinal analysis of the steel alternate for the I-95 extradosed stayed-cable bridge on the PHMB. Velvet was part of the Lafayette Bridge preliminary design project team serving as a structural engineer involved in the analysis and preliminary design of five superstructure alternatives. She was also involved in the final design and Load Rating Analysis for the Palmetto Dolphin Interchange in Miami, Florida which included 10 segmental concrete bridges. Velvet is a licensed engineer in MN. Education: BSCE and MSCE - University of South Florida.

Mark Maves, PE – Deputy Project Manager: Mark will serve as the Deputy Project Manager. He will serve as the local office liaison with MnDOT and will assist Steve with project management activities such as project budget and invoicing. Mark has 26 years of experience in project management, preliminary and final design, construction plan preparation and specifications for major bridge engineering projects including many projects involving multiple agencies and stakeholders. He has considerable experience with major river bridge projects and has a long history with MnDOT procedures and methods for design and plan production. Mark has conducted quality tasks on several river crossing projects including Lafayette Bridge peer review, Dresbach Bridge preliminary design, Stillwater Lift Bridge repair project, and the Camden Bridge rehabilitation project. Mark is a licensed engineer in Minnesota. Education: BSCE - University of Minnesota / URS Certified Project Manager, URS Quality Management System.

Scott Montgomery, PE – Lead Quality Control Check Engineer: Scott has a strong background in bridge design, inspection, load rating analyses, and construction-phase services for structures in both steel and concrete. He has also served as the Tampa Bridge group quality control manager, responsible for quality training and quality audits for projects including the PHMB. Education: BSCE - University of South Florida, MSE - University of Texas at Austin

Ed Bell, PE – Quality Assurance Manager: Ed is the Tampa office Quality Control Manager. He also is an accomplished bridge design engineer with substantial experience in structural steel, reinforced concrete, and for both long-span cable- stayed, extradosed, and conventional bridges. Typical projects are described below. Education: BSCE - Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute, MSCE - Stanford University

David Jeakle, PE – Construction Engineer (Constructability): David’s 20-year professional career has been focused on the conceptual development, detailed design and erection engineering for complex and long-span bridge structures. He has been active on a wide variety of bridge projects involving concrete and steel grade separations, segmental concrete structures, and long-span cable-stayed bridges. In addition, his involvement on complex bridge projects includes roles such as technical advisor, value- engineering participant, constructability and peer reviewer. David is a licensed engineer in MN. Education: BSCE - Michigan State University, MSCE - University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL

Page 18 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

Jeff Gebhard, PE – Geotechnical Engineer: Jeff has more than 12 years of geotechnical experience working with owners, contractors and designers. This has given him a unique perspective and understanding of client needs. He has managed dozens of large-scale transportation and deep foundation-related geotechnical projects, employing innovation and a constructibility mindset to reduce risk and provide cost savings for his clients. Jeff is a licensed engineer in MN. Education: BSCE - Iowa State University

Dan Duzan, PE – Electrical Engineer: Dan’s work history consists of 23 years of experience in electrical engineering and control systems. He leads the inspection, engineering and design of electrical distribution, lighting, MEP and control systems for movable bridges, roadways and structures. Dan is a licensed engineer in both Minnesota and Wisconsin. Education: BSEE - University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign

Craig Johnson, PE – Hydraulics Engineer: Hydraulics Engineer: Mr. Johnson has over 14 years of experience in civil engineering; in particular, roadway drainage, water resources, and utility relocation projects. Craig is a licensed engineer in MN. Education: BSCE - University of Minnesota

Page 19 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 St. Croix Crossing Project Final Bridge Design

Est. Hours % of Time Expected dedicated to Dedicated Key Personnel Current Projects Completion St. Croix to those Date Project Per projects Week

Steve Stroh, PE, PhD Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, New Haven, CT. 2015 5% 40

2nd Street – Austin, Texas; 2014 Bob Anderson, PE 408 / 417 Interchange – Orlando, FL; 2013 5% 40 Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, New Haven, CT. 2015

Velvet Bridges, PE 408 / 417 Interchange – Orlando, FL 2013 5% 40

Puerto Rico Load Ratings; Port Access Bridge Load 2013; 2012; Scott Montgomery, PE Rating, Alaska; SR 123 over Tom’s Creek BDR, FDOT; Varies 40* 2012 and 2012 Veteran’s Expressway, Tampa, FL

Ed Bell, PE Tampa Office Quality Audits Ongoing varies 20* Oslo Bridge Rehab, Oslo, MN 2012 40% Mark Maves, PE 40* Bridge 62610, St. Paul, MN 2012 40% Dave Jeakle, PE Various 40* Jeff Gebhard, PE Various 2013 15% 40* I-110 2012 10% Dan Duzan, PE LADOT Remote Control Study 2012 20% 40* O’Hare ATS Design 2012 10% Sturgeon Lake Drainage Design, Red Wing, MN 2012 20% Craig Johnson, PE Metro Transit OHB (Site Design) 2012 15% 40* Various 2013 15%

* Availability at Key Intervals

6. Level of MnDOT’s Participation URS has reviewed the services and materials to be provided by MnDOT as listed in the RFP’s Scope of Work. The descriptions and the amount of participation by MnDOT clearly indicates that URS will be working closely with MnDOT, WisDOT, the Peer Reviewer and other key project members. Our Team welcomes this approach by MnDOT and looks forward to the development of a high quality, successful project. The key services and items to be provided by MnDOT are as follows. • Provide project oversight and direction • Review and approve submittals in a timely manner • Assist in the delivery of submittals to stakeholders such as the MN and WI SHPOs • Participation by appropriate staff at project design team and stakeholder meetings • Lead or assist with the Public and Outreach Information Activities • Coordinate communications with Peer Review Team • Provide all items listed in the RFP Section 14.2

The Quality Management Plan, Key Personnel Resumes, and Required Forms are located in the Appendix.

Page 20 URS Corporation April 27, 2012 Quality Management Plan Quality Management Plan Quality Management

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN

Final Bridge Design

for the

St. Croix Crossing Project

Minnesota Department of Transportation

Bridge 62921 2920

URS Corporation

April 27, 2012

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………. 1

2. PROJECT SCOPE………………………………………………………………………………… 1

3. INTENT OF THE QMP…………………………………………………………………………… 2

4. QUALITY PHILOSOPHY………………………………………………………………… ……… 2

5. PROJECT QUALITY TEAM (ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE)…………………… ……… 3

6. SCHEDULE OF WORK…………………………………………………………………………... 4

7. LIST OF REQUIREMENTS………………………………………………………………...... 4

8. OVERVIEW OF TECHNICAL DOCUMENT REVIEW PROCESS……………………………. 5

9. PROCESS TO INTEGRATE PEER REVIEWER AND STATE INTO DESIGN PROCESS……. 9

10. DEFINITIONS…………………………………………………………………………………….. 9

11. APPENDIX – QUALITY MANAGEMENT FORMS (To be Added in Final QMP)….…………

i | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

1. INTRODUCTION The following Quality Management Plan (QMP) summarizes the disciplined program proposed by URS Corporation to minimize errors and omissions and maximize quality for the work associated with the Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix River Crossing. This quality management plan is based on the URS Quality Management System and will serve as general guidance for quality management for the work being performed on this project. To achieve this goal, URS works to continuously improve our Quality Management System (QMS) and the policies, processes and procedures it encapsulates. These procedures will be followed throughout the course of the above referenced project. The QMP is part of a project specific URS Project Execution Plan (PXP). The PXP is produced for every URS project and is an internal document used by all team members during the execution of the project. It includes information on project scope, team organization, client information, lines of communication, Quality Management Plan, Safe Work Plan, schedule, budget, project controls, and deliverables. URS is committed to providing quality work products and services. The QMP describes the basic quality management practices, processes, procedures, training, and the organizational structure used to deliver quality products that meet the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MnDOT) requirements for this project. Documentation of all quality procedures will be maintained in a QMP project file established for this project and will be available for inspection by MnDOT. 2. PROJECT SCOPE The primary Scope of Services to be provided by URS is as follows: A new river bridge has been developed by The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) in conjunction with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) as part of the St. Croix River Crossing Project. The new bridge will replace the 80-year old Stillwater Lift Bridge with a four-lane road that will carry Trunk Highway (TH) 36 over TH 95, the Union Pacific Railroad, and the St. Croix River. The 5,072 foot long bridge (Bridge 82045) will be composed of eight extradosed main river spans and seven concrete box girder approach spans. Two concrete box girder ramp bridges join the main bridge at a common pier just inland from the Minnesota shoreline. Ramp Bridge 82047 is an off-ramp for westbound traffic to TH 95, has five spans, variable depth, variable width, and includes a pedestrian/bicycle trail. Ramp Bridge 82048 is an on-ramp for eastbound traffic from TH 95, has 7 spans, and variable depth and width. The scope of the Final Bridge Design of the St. Croix Crossing (Contract No. 00610) is to design and prepare three separate bridge plans (for Bridges 82045, 82047 and 82048), Special Provisions, cost estimate, and conduct an independent review of the hydraulic analysis performed to date. The scope of this contract also includes design of and separate plans for the Xcel barge unloader facility and the removal of this facility following construction of the new bridge. A final bridge design peer review will be solicited by MnDOT under a separate contract (Contract No. 00904). URS will prepare and submit Certified Final Bridge Plans for Bridges 82045, 82047 and 82048. Tasks for this contract include, but are not limited to the following: • Design and Load Rating Criteria Development for each bridge • Concept Design (30% Plan) for each bridge • Final Design (60% Plan) for each bridge • Final Construction Plans (95% Plan) for each bridge • Final Certified Bridge Plans (completed Plan) for each bridge • Load Rating for each bridge, and the development of a Bridge Rating Manual • Development of complete SB Division Special Provisions for Bridges 82045, 82047, and 82048, • Development of a Final Engineer’s Estimate for each bridge; • Development of CPM (Primavera P6) schedule for bridge design activities; • Project meetings, including peer review coordination for the aforementioned items; • Development of a Bridge Maintenance and Inspection Manual

1 | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

All work on this project will be performed in English units, and the plans, specifications, estimates, reports, etc. produced will be shown in English units. Final submittals of plans and specifications will be made in both reproducible hard copy originals and electronic files (latest version of MicroStation and Microsoft Word). 3. INTENT OF THE QMP The intent of the QMP is to define the processes and procedures used for implementing, checking, auditing and monitoring project quality on a systematic, ongoing basis. This QMP serves as a working document to communicate the QC and QA requirements and to facilitate training associated with the Quality Procedures for the project. The QMP will not be revised without approval from MnDOT. However, it is recognized that this is a living document, subject to ongoing review and revision to better meet the needs of the interested parties over the life of the project. Revisions to facilitate, improve, and implement the quality procedures and processes are likely and welcomed when they promote development of a superior end product.

4. QUALITY PHILOSOPHY This Quality Management Plan (QMP) is a specific plan, for this bridge peer review project, based on URS’ Quality Management System (QMS). This Plan complies with applicable portions of the QMS’s Corporate Quality Manual, as well as the ISO 9001:2008 (ISO 9001) family of standards. The URS quality philosophy is best expressed in our QMS Policy Statement:

URS is committed to an effective, technically sound, and transparent design process that is continually monitored to assure that it meets technical, contractual and managerial project requirements. The purpose of the Quality program is to provide guidelines for systematic and disciplined methods and work practices that, when diligently implemented, will enhance the professional practice of design engineering by project personnel.

The URS Team will identify opportunities for improvement and seek to continually improve staff capabilities, quality of deliverables and value of service over the course of the project.

Through a well-designed and effectively implemented Quality program, the URS Team will meet Client requirements and exceed performance expectations.

URS values the relationship we have with MnDOT. We build and maintain that relationship by employing and training staff that: • provides quality services and deliverables that meet MnDOT’s budget and schedule, • understands and adheres to project quality management plans, • acts with transparency, honesty and integrity, • performs tasks with pride and honor, • works cooperatively with MnDOT to proactively solve problems • listens to MnDOT to understand their needs, and • sets the standard for performance

2 | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

5. PROJECT QUALITY TEAM (ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE) The following Key Personnel will be assigned to this project and will be instrumental in managing the project’s Quality Control and Quality Assurance: Project Manager (PM) / Steve Stroh, PE, PhD: Responsible authority for overall project management; project coordination with MnDOT, stakeholders, and the Peer Reviewer; and all deliverables. Responsible for the independent review of the entire plan design and production process for completeness and adequacy of the work and conformance to the URS QMP. He will also be responsible for resolving all design-related issues between the URS design team and the Peer Reviewer. Quality Assurance Manager (QAM) / Ed Bell, PE: Responsible for the administration and implementation of the QMP and performing Quality Assurance audits for all work deliverables. Responsible, along with the PM, for the independent review of the entire plan design and production process for completeness and adequacy of the work and conformance to the URS QMP. Quality Control Check Engineer (QCE) / Scott Montgomery, PE: Responsible for the implementation of production-related Quality Control (QC) procedures, including detailed checks, independent design and analysis, constructability reviews and independent technical reviews. He is assisted directly by a team of bridge designers/checkers that will work independently of the main bridge design team, separation will occur via a firewall. He is responsible for resolving design and analysis differences between the main bridge design team and the independent bridge team. He is responsible for staffing and training the independent team per the QC procedures within this QMP. Lead Bridge Engineer & Extradosed Engineer/ Steve Stroh, PE, PhD: Responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the bridge design calculations, plans, special provisions and bridge ratings for all three bridges. Responsible for managing the entire design and plan production team and for coordinating quality reviews between the design team and the independent design and analysis team led by Scott Montgomery. Constructability Review (CR) / David Jeakle, PE: Responsible for conducting reviews of the design plans regarding the constructability of the bridges at 30%, 60% and 95% plan review. This will include reviewing and making recommendations on a preferred type of construction method (i.e. precast or cost-in-place segmental). Dave will be assisted by Paul Sylvestri (substructures and foundations) and Ted von Rosenvinge (foundations). Independent Technical Reviewer (ITR) - Bridge / Tom Lovett, PE: Responsible for conducting independent reviews of all bridge criteria, design plans and special provisions. Tom will report to Scott Montgomery (QCE) and will not have any direct project contact with any bridge design activities. Cost Estimating / David Cabage, CCC: Responsible for conducting an Engineers Estimate for each bridge. David will be assisted by Steve Stroh and Scott Montgomery in the resolution of the final Engineer’s Estimate with the contractor-style cost estimate being produced by the Peer Reviewer. Geotechnical Engineer / Jeff Gebhard, PE: Responsible for establishing the criteria for the foundation type and design. Responsible for the foundation recommendations and the geotechnical engineering review. Responsible for managing the QC/QA process for all Braun analysis and recommendation reports. Process to follow procedures as outlined in this QMP. Hydraulics Engineer / Craig Johnson, PE: Responsible for reviewing the project and bridge drainage design and analysis. Responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the bridge deck drainage system. Responsible for managing the QC/QA process for all Rani Engineering design and analysis work. Process to follow procedures as outlined in this QMP. Electrical Engineer / Dan Duzan, PE: Responsible for reviewing, designing and certifying bridge roadway lighting, bridge pier lighting, bridge trail lighting, navigational lighting, aircraft lighting, and interior box lighting.

3 | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

6. SCHEDULE OF WORK The following abbreviated Schedule of Work meets MnDOT’s final delivery date of certified plans by May, 2013 and final bridge ratings by August, 2013. For a more detailed schedule please see the proposal.

7. LIST OF REQUIREMENTS Providing quality deliverables requires a full understanding of the project design requirements and standards to be followed in performing the work. The key technical reference document requirements for this project are summarized below. 7.1 MnDOT Technical Requirements  LRFD Bridge Design Manual (www.dot.state.mn.us/ bridge/manuals/LRFD/index.html)  Bridge Details Manual – Part I (www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge/cadd/ bridged.html)  Bridge Details Manual – Part II (www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge/cadd/ bridgedpart2.html)  Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (www.dot.state.mn.us/preletting/spec/index.html)  Special Provisions (www.dot.state.mn.us/pre-letting/ prov/index.html)  Computer Assisted Design & Drafting (CADD) Standards (www.dot.state.mn.us/ bridge/cadd/index.html)  Standard Plates (standardplates.dot.state.mn.us/StdPlate.aspx)  Technical Memoranda (techmemos.dot.state.mn.us/)  Drainage Manual (www.dot.state.mn.us/bridge/ hydraulics/drainagemanual/index.html)  Geotechnical and Pavement Manual  Roadway Design Manual (www.dot.state.mn.us/design/ rdm/index.html)  Trns*port Item Lists (www.bidlet.dot.state.mn.us/english2005•aspx)  Aesthetic Guidelines for Bridge Design  Preliminary Subsurface Investigation and Foundation Evaluation  Staff-approved Geometric Layout  Design Memorandum dated July 2009

7.2 AASHTO and Other Technical Documents  LRFD Specifications for Highway Bridges by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO), w/ 2012 interims

4 | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

 The Manual for Bridge Evaluation, AASHTO, First Edition, 2008  American Segmental Bridge Institute (ASBI) Bridge Construction Manual  Post Tensioning Institute Recommendations for Stay-Cable Design, Testing and Installation  Applicable Draft PTI standards for extradosed bridges (per development of Design Criteria)  FHWA Post Tensioning Installation and Grouting Manual  CEB/FIP Model Code for Concrete Structures, 1978 (For Time Dependent Behavior of Concrete)  St. Croix River Crossing Concept Refinement Report dated June 2010  2011 St. Croix River Crossing VQM Addendum  2007 St. Croix River Crossing VQM  2006 SFEIS for the St. Croix River Crossing Project, and all project development supporting documents  2006 Water Resources Preliminary Design Report, as amended by HZ United in 2012  Cost Risk Assessment -Value Engineering (CRAVE) Study findings  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidelines for aerial beacons

8. OVERVIEW OF TECHNICAL DOCUMENT REVIEW PROCESS 8.1 PROCEDURES 8.1.1 Contents of Submittals URS will use procedures and dedicated forms to track and document quality comments, verifications, approvals, and audits. The Project Planning Checklist will be used to document the review and checking of all project deliverables. The checklist will be located in the project quality file. 8.1.2 Detail Checking Procedure The Detail Checking Procedure is a verifying procedure whereby all information of a project deliverable document is verified for correctness, completeness and technical adequacy. All URS design analyses, calculations, quantities, and reports are to be checked prior to submittal to the client by a senior engineer who is independent from the originator of the document to be checked, but part of the project team. The checker shall have experience equal to or greater than that of the original designer. Detailed procedures for the checking of these documents are defined in this QMP. For the St. Croix Final Bridge Design, Scott Montgomery has been selected as the Lead Quality Control Check Engineer (QCE). He will be responsible for the Quality Control of all the design activities. He will lead an independent team of engineers in the review and quality control checking of the design plans, calculations, quantities, special provisions, cost estimates, ratings, and reports. URS will officially set up a firewall between the independent bridge review team and the main bridge design team such that no interaction takes place other than quality checking meetings held to pass on information or to resolve design differences. Responsibilities The originator performs the original calculation or creates the original drawing. The detail checker is responsible for verifying the document in accordance with the procedure. The originator is responsible for back checking the comments, provided by the checker, for agreement. Both the originator and the checker are responsible for resolving their differences if there are any. The detail checker is responsible for verifying the correctness and completeness of the incorporation of comments. The QCE is responsible for approving the detail-checking procedure at its completion.

5 | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

Construction Plans At various stages of drawing preparation, the Lead Design Engineer releases prints (or digital files) of the drawing(s) to project engineers for review and comment. The originator responsible for the subject drawings accepts or otherwise resolves the ensuing comments and modifies the drawings accordingly. Unresolved issues are arbitrated or resolved by the QCE. After the last comment review has been completed and resolutions have been incorporated onto the drawing by the originator, the drawing is forwarded to the independent checker. The checker checks the drawing in accordance with conventional engineering practices and the standard requirements for checking design drawings. The front sheet shall be stamped with a rubber stamp in order to present the following information: date checked, document number and status, and names of the checker, originator and technician. The signatures of these individuals signify, respectively, the approval of the detail-checking procedure, verification of the correct incorporation of comments, back-checking of the comments, and incorporation of the comments. The document shall be marked up in accordance with URS’ Guidelines for Color-Coded Marking of Work Products. The QCE finally reviews the checking process and approves it by signing/stamping the Detail Check Report and dating it. The plans and forms are then submitted to the QAM for auditing. Calculations When calculations have been completed, the QCE in communication with the Lead Design Engineer will assign an experienced, competent, qualified person selected from the project team to check them. Calculations normally are checked immediately after completion to limit the possibility of perpetuating errors in subsequent calculations, drawings or specifications. Calculations are checked in accordance with URS’ Guidelines for Preparing and Checking Calculations. Discrepancies found by the checker are discussed with the originator and corrected. Unresolved differences between the checker and originator are brought to the attention of the Lead Design Engineer for resolution. The checker initials and dates all pages of the hand calculations, the first page of each computer run containing the input information, and the page containing the results of the computer run. This signifies that the calculations and computer input are accurate, and the computer results are reasonable and as expected. When all differences have been resolved and revisions to the design calculations have been made, the checker signs the Calculation Cover Sheet. This is then included as the cover for each section of calculations. The QCE will review and approve the calculations by signing the Calculation Cover Sheet. The QCE's signature on the cover sheet of a bound set of calculations indicates completion and signifies approval of that set of calculations. The calculations and forms will then be forwarded to the QAM for auditing. Checking of Calculations Using the Independent Check Method The independent design check involves the complete verification of all design elements and details along with verification that all project standards and criteria have been satisfied. The design and analysis check is to be based entirely from the drawings produced by the main design team. This check results in two complete sets of design calculations (i.e., the original set of calculations and the independent design set of calculations). Computerized calculations may be used, provided that the software is validated. Independent computer programs from the main design team’s design are to be utilized. The independent checkers are part of a separate team and will not

6 | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

have participated in the original design. They will not present or investigate new or alternative design approaches. They will be responsible, led by the QCE, for resolving discrepancies with the main design team led by the Lead Design Engineer. 1) When a project reaches a stage of completion where checking can begin, the originator shall assemble any design criteria, project standards, unmarked set of plans, and any draft special provisions. 2) The checker shall review the general plans, typical sections, and bridge layout sheets for any omissions, conflicts, incompatible structural framing or other major component features prior to continuing the check. 3) The checker completely recalculates the geometric layout. Use of independent computer programs is recommended as long as the program has been verified. These calculations shall be documented in the same manner as original calculations to indicate that checks were made. Structural design check calculations shall not be started until items 2 through 3 are completed. Any discrepancies must be resolved with the originator. If revisions are necessary, the originator will revise the design and details before the checker proceeds. 4) The checker shall produce a set of independent calculations for the design of superstructure and substructure elements. The checker will also produce an independent set of quantity calculations. A meeting will be held to discuss the design differences/discrepancies that may be found by the checker. The originator will check the checker's calculations governing the discrepancy, following the checking procedures in this QMP. When resolution has occurred, both the originator and the checker will sign the Calculation Cover Sheet. If revisions are necessary, the originator will revise the design and details before the checker proceeds further. The checker will check the revision and sign off those calculation sheets and on the plan sheets as the checker. The QCE will review and approve the calculations by signing the Calculation Cover Sheet. The QCE's signature on the cover sheet of a bound set of calculations indicates completion and signifies approval of that set of calculations. The calculations and forms will then be forwarded to the QAM for auditing. Once the QAM has signed the audit, the QCE will submit a certified memo to MnDOT that confirms that all aspects of the independent check have been performed in accordance with the QMP. Reports / Specifications The technical content of the report or specifications shall be reviewed by a detail checker assigned by the Lead Design Engineer as required by the report content and the professional standards of care. The checking procedure will be documented by the checker’s marked-up document. The front sheet shall be stamped with a rubber stamp containing the following information: the checked date and the names of the Lead Design Engineer, proofreader, originator, and the signatures of these individuals signifying, respectively, approval of the detail-checking procedure, verification of the correct incorporation of comments, back-checking of the comments, and incorporation of the comments. The document shall be marked up in accordance with the Standard Color-Coded Marking Procedure. The QCE will review and approve the report or specifications by signing the Cover Sheet. The QCR's signature on the cover sheet indicates completion and signifies approval of the report or specifications. The documents will then be forwarded to the QAM for auditing. 8.1.3 Independent Technical Review The purpose of the independent technical review (ITR) is to verify the quality and integrity of project tasks and written project deliverables for compliance with contractual obligations and the standard of professional practice. The independent technical review shall be conducted for all 30%, 60% and 95% plan submittals, all reports, Special Provisions, and cost estimates. The ITR is a documented critical review performed by personnel having technical expertise in the subject matter to be reviewed (or a critical subset of the subject matter to be reviewed) who are not part of the project team. To separate these reviewers from the design team, they will report directly to the QCE. The required expertise may include a degree and the necessary licensing, certifications or professional experience at least equivalent to that needed for the original work. Independent technical reviews are critical reviews and evaluations of documents, material or data that require interpretation or judgment to verify or validate assumptions, plans, results or conclusions. They also serve to verify that the completed work meets contractual requirements.

ITR Scope of Review

7 | Page

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Bridge Design for the St. Croix Crossing Project

The ITR includes a critical evaluation of the basis and validity of significant conclusions, opinions, assumptions, evaluations, recommendations, designs and other items that are required as an end result of the project services. It emphasizes establishing the validity of the technical approach and other procedures used to form an opinion of the suitability of the end result. The review does not include a complete detail check of calculations or a detail check of plans, but does include verification that the required detail plan and calculation checking has been performed prior to the review. Comments shall be noted on the Independent Technical Review Comments form. Comments also may be noted directly on the work product being reviewed using the standard marking color codes. 8.1.5 Constructability Review The Constructability Reviewer is responsible for becoming familiar with the project requirements, criteria and the scope of the review; performing an independent objective review in regards to the constructability of the bridges. He will review the plans at 30%, 60% and 95% and produce a report of findings. The report will follow the quality checking procedures outlined above. 8.1.6 Computer Software Input and Output Computer Software Input and Output checking will be consistent with checking procedures outlined above and the following: The originator will assess the input and output for completeness, accuracy and reasonableness and randomly check a small percentage of the output results prior to submitting it for review (checking). The checker will review the output and perform a random check of a small percentage of the results for "reasonableness." Software versions will be identified and version control as well as time and date of any computer runs will be identified in the documentation. Discrepancies will be documented as identified above, unless other specific group procedures have been established. 8.1.7 Computer Software Validation URS only uses software that has previously been validated. If using for the first time, hand calculations will be performed documented and checked. A hand calculation with the same formulation or a parallel technique will be documented and checked in accordance with the Calculation Detail Checking procedure. The same input and assumptions utilized in the hand calculations are formatted and input in to the computer to check the software. The output of the computer is compared to the results of the hand calculation with each corresponding answer annotated as equivalent values. Differences are to be explained on the output sheet. Complete documentation of the validation process will be recorded on the Technical Software Verification and Control Form, including fully checked calculations, checked computer input, printout of program, and annotated output printout. 8.1.8 Additional Quality Control/Assurance Items URS will give additional attention to the design and quality checking of several specialty items as outlined in the RFP. These include but are not limited to • Materials and details • Wind Engineering Study • Corrosion protection system, including the deck anchorage blister and associated cable connection • Maintenance and inspection access • Cable Replacement o Cable Corrosion Protection o Cable color for thermal protection o Consideration of duct couplers at Design Criteria development stage o Cable damping requirements • Final Design Criteria and Load Ratings Criteria 8.2 VERIFICATION OF QUALITY CONTROL (INTERNAL AUDITS) 8.2.1 Product Audits Product Audits will be performed by the QAM to certify that the proper quality procedures and applicable reviews have been implemented. Work items submitted for audit will be accompanied by an Internal Quality Audit Report. The QAM will conduct the audit, document any findings, and sign the form. Findings are classified as either major, minor, or observations. Each minor or major finding will be translated into a Corrective Action. The QAM and PM will independently review the entire plan design and production process for completeness and adequacy of the work and for conformance to the URS QMP.

8 | Page

Resumes Resumes Steven L. Stroh, PhD, PE Project Manager Areas of Expertise Bridge Project Management Overview Cable-Stayed Bridge Design Dr. Stroh is active in project management, preliminary and final bridge Extradosed Bridge Design design, construction document preparation, and construction-phase Years of Experience services for selected complex bridge projects. His expertise includes With URS: 28 Years involvement in more than 20 cable supported bridges, and he was the With Other Firms: 8 Years design manager and engineer of record for the first extradosed prestressed bridge designed and constructed in the United States. Education BSE/1981/Civil Engineering/ Project Specific Experience University of South Florida Extradosed Bridges MSCE/1987/Civil Engineering/ Design Manager and Engineer of Record, Pearl Harbor Memorial University of South Florida Bridge, Connecticut DOT, New Haven, Connecticut (1999- Present): Developed both a steel and concrete alternative design for an Doctor of Philosophy/2012/Civil Engineering/University of South innovative extradosed prestressed bridge design. Bridges are twin three span structures with 157m main spans. Each deck is variable width Florida accommodating 5-lanes of traffic, full shoulders and a variable ramp taper. Registration/Certification The design features an explicit attention to aesthetics with carefully Professional Engineer proportioned elements and provision of aesthetic lighting. Project 1981/Florida #32062 included plans and specifications for research related instrumentation and 1990/North Carolina #16489 testing that included strain gauging, accelerometers, thermocouples and 1990/California #C46251 displacement transducers. Providing construction phase services for the 1992/Massachusetts #36656 selected concrete alternative. 1994/Michigan #6201039516 1996/Texas #81249 Cable-Stayed Bridges 1997/Utah #350762-2202 Project Manager and Engineer of Record, Ironton Russell Bridge 1998/New Mexico #14149 over the Ohio River, Ohio DOT, (2008-Present): Prepared 1998/Ohio #E-62970 preliminary design, final design, and construction phase services for a 1999/South Carolina #19676 concrete cable stayed bridge crossing of the Ohio river between Ironton 1999/Alaska #9998 Ohio and Russell Kentucky. Bridge is a three-span symmetrical concrete 2000/Minnesota #40797 cable stayed bridge with a 900-foot main span. Superstructure is a 2001/Georgia #27231 concrete edge girder arrangement cast in place with a traveling form. 2003/Kentucky #22921 Towers are delta shaped. 2004/Connecticut #23293 2004/Louisiana #E-31221 Technical Design Lead, Bridge of Honor (Pomeroy-Mason Bridge), 2004/Wisconsin #37246-006 Ohio DOT, Pomeroy, (2004-2009): Provided preliminary design, final 2006/Delaware #14824 design, and construction phase services of a concrete cable stayed bridge 2007/Missouri #PE-2007012528 with a main span of 675 feet. Design features a cast-in-place edge girder 2010/Hawaii #PE 13902 deck system and delta-shaped tower. Developed a maintenance and 2011/Washington #48108 inspection manual.The Bridge of Excellence wan the 2011 American 2011/Indiana #11100622 Segmental Bridge Institute (ASBI) Award of Excellence. Lead Design Engineer and Design Manager, Ma Wan and Kap Shui Mun Bridge, Government of Hong Kong Highway Department, Hong Kong (1992-1997): Provided preliminary design, final design and construction-phase services for development of Steven L. Stroh, PE (cont’d.)

alternatives and construction plans for the winning design / build tender. Bridges are part of the Lantau Fixed Crossing system linking the new Hong Kong International Airport at Chek Lap Kok Island with Hong Kong Island. The bridges, which are double-deck structures to carry mass transit rail facilities and auto traffic, include a hybrid concrete / steel cable-stayed bridge with a 430-meter main span and a concrete box girder . Design Engineer, Fred Hartman Houston Ship Channel Bridge (Steel Alternative), Texas DOT, Baytown, Texas (1984-1986): Provided conceptual design for twin three-span cable-stayed structures with a 1,250-foot main span, side spans of 482’, and common double- delta-shaped concrete towers. Also provided construction-phase services and prepared the Bridge Maintenance Manual. Project Manager and Bridge Design Lead, Feasibility Study for Best Alternative for Crossing the Panama Canal at the Atlantic Side, Panama (2010): This study of crossing alternatives included bored and immersed tube tunnels and a high-level cable-stayed bridge crossing with a 530-meter main span. Study included traffic analysis, alignment studies, and preparation of Environmental Impact Statement for preferred bridge Project Manager, I-35/TH 62 Interchange, Minnesota DOT, Minneapolis, Minnesota (2000-2001): Managed the development of six segmental concrete bridges for this interchange, based on use of the AASHTO/PCI/ASBI standard segments. Engineer of Record for two bridge sites, including a three span and a four span segmental concrete bridge designed for balanced cantilever construction.

Professional Societies/ Committee Membership Post Tensioning Institute (PTI) Committee on Stay Cables. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Standards Committee on wind tunnel testing of buildings and structures American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Committee on Cable Supported Bridges American Concrete Institute (ACI), Joint ASCE/ACI Committee 343 (Concrete Bridge Design) (Past Chairman) ACI Committee 341 (Earthquake Resistant Concrete Bridges) American Segmental Bridge Institute (ASBI) Board of Directors Honors/Recognition 2006 American Segmental Bridge Institute Leadership Award for outstanding contributions to the design and use of concrete segmental and extradosed bridges. Selected Publications Stroh, Steven L., “On the Development of the Extradosed Bridge Concept”, Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, University of South Florida, February 8, 2012.

2 Mark K. Maves, PE Deputy Project Manager

Overview Mr. Maves manages multi-discipline transportation projects having structures as one of their major components. He is the business sector leader for bridges at URS’ Minneapolis office. He is involved as a project manager and bridge design lead in the planning, conceptual design, preliminary and final design, preparation of construction plans, and writing of specifications for pedestrian, roadway and railroad bridges and miscellaneous structural engineering projects. Years of Experience Project Specific Experience With URS: 26 Years MnDOT - Bridge 62017 & 62018 (Lafayette Bridge), St. Paul, MN: Education Project Manager for the peer review of the final bridge design of the BS/Civil Engineering, University of concrete segmental box girder alternative. Mark managed the Minnesota/1985 independent analysis, plan review, special provision review, Registration/Certification constructibility review, and independent load rating analysis of the Final Design Consultant for this bridge type. Professional Engineer Minnesota/ #20496/1990 MnDOT - Bridge 62017 & 62018 (Lafayette Bridge), St. Paul, MN Wisconsin/#30124/1994 (2008-2009): Bridge Design Manager for the preliminary bridge design Montana/#15570/2002 effort involving various alternative bridge types, a Report of Findings documenting the design investigation, and the preparation of preliminary Training plans for the concrete segmental box girder alternative. LRFD Bridge Design URS Project Manager Training MnDOT - Bridge 4654 (Stillwater Lift Bridge), Stillwater, MN Project Manager for the analysis, design and plan preparation for the URS Quality Training rehabilitation and conversion of the Lift Bridge to a pedestrian/bicycle trail. MnDOT, Bridge 85801 & 85802 (Dresbach Bridge), Dresbach, MN: Preliminary Design Engineer for the plan production and checking of the 2593’ long concrete segmental box at I-90 over the Mississippi River in SE Minnesota. City of Minneapolis - Camden Bridge, Minneapolis, MN: Project Manager for the rehabilitation of a 1,690’ bridge over the Mississippi River in Northeast Minneapolis. Coordinated and managed design and plan detail activities involving deck and joint replacement, and removal and replacement of steel girder pin & hanger assemblies with new spliced steel ship-lap bearing type assemblies at 21 girder locations. Hennepin County - Minnesota Twins Ballpark (Target Field) Plaza Bridge, Minneapolis, MN: Project Manager for the conceptual, preliminary and final design and construction engineering of a 100,000 sq. ft. (2.3 acre) pedestrian bridge over I-394 in downtown Minneapolis. MnDOT - Oronoco TH 52 Design-Build, Oronoco, MN: Design Manager for a 4 mile reconstruction and expansion of TH 52 north from 85th St. in Rochester to 59th Avenue in Oronoco including 6 new pre-cast concrete beam bridges. Robert B. Anderson, PE Senior Structural Engineer

Overview With over 29 years of diverse design engineering and management experience, Mr. Anderson is instrumental in the successful delivery of numerous projects. This experience includes preliminary and final design of bridges and associated structures in both steel and concrete, including grade separations, multi-level, interchanges, viaducts, water crossings, and encompassing segmental concrete, long-span cable-stayed, and design- Areas of Expertise build projects. His technical expertise is enhanced by active participation in several committees of the American Concrete Institute and through the Structural Analysis and Design authoring and presentation of many technical articles. He has significant  Preliminary involvement in the construction phase of many projects and also has  Final experience in inspection, load rating, and rehabilitation of existing bridges.  Post-Design Typical projects are described below. Construction Support Services Bridge Load Ratings Representative Projects - Specific Experience Years of Experience Deputy Structures Design Manager / Senior Structural Engineer, With URS: 23 Years Pearl Harbor Memorial Extradosed Cable Stayed Bridge, New With Other Firms: 6 Years Haven, Connecticut (2001-2004, 2007-2012): Lead all aspects of Education preliminary and final design, including preparation of contract documents, and providing engineering cost estimates for alternate steel and concrete MSE/1988/University of Texas at extradosed cable-stayed bridges. With a main span of 515 feet, this highly Austin aesthetic structure will be the first extradosed cable stayed bridge BSCE/1983/South Dakota State constructed in the United States (I-95 crossing the Quinnipiac River with University an estimated cost of $400 million). The extradosed system is a hybrid Registration/Certification design and essentially a marriage between girder and stayed cable systems 1991/Professional Engineer/ Florida #43851 Other Projects 1998/Professional Engineer/Utah Engineer of Record, Dames Point Bridge – Rehabilitation, Jacksonville, #98-353405-2202 Florida (2009-2012) 2005/Professional Engineer/ Minnesota #44467 Senior Structural Engineer, Redundancy Analysis for US 41 Steel Box 2006/Professional Engineer/ Girder Fly-Over Ramps, Green Bay, Wisconsin (2009-2010) Missouri #2006012364 Technical Advisor, Final Design of Ironton Russell Concrete Cable Stayed 2010/Professional Engineer/ Bridge over the Ohio River, Ohio DOT, Ironton, Ohio (2010) Indiana #11012187 Senior Structural Engineer, I-90 Mississippi River Bridge, Dresbach, Minnesota (2008-2010)

Engineer of Record, I-35W/TH 62 Cross-town, Minneapolis, Minnesota (2005-2006)

Lead Structural Engineer, Final Design of U.S. Grant Cable Stayed Bridge, Portsmith, Ohio (1999-2000)

Lead Engineer, Kap Shui Mun Bridge and Ma Wan Viaducts, Hong Kong (1991-1995) Velvet Bridges, PE Senior Bridge Engineer

Overview Ms. Bridges has 23 years of civil engineering experience mainly in the design and analysis of pre-tensioned and post-tensioned concrete bridges, including precast and cast-in-place segmental, by the following construction methods: long span balanced cantilever, span-by-span erection, and progressive launching. She also has significant experience in the design of conventional cast-in-place post-tensioned box, and AASHTO girder bridges. Specific examples of her experience are described below: Areas of Expertise Representative Projects - Specific Experience Structural Analysis and Design Project Engineer, Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, ConnDOT, New  Preliminary Haven, Connecticut (2001-2004; 2007-2012): Performed the structural  Final analysis of the concrete extradosed Bridge (I-95 crossing the Quinnipiac  Post-Design River with an estimated cost of $100 million) including construction Construction Support Services staging, time-dependent, and non-linear analysis. Responsible for the Bridge Load Ratings Superstructure Details in the drawing plans of the Concrete Alternate. Years of Experience Also performed an independent analysis of the steel extradosed bridge alternate for the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing, Connecticut. This With URS: 11 Years design-bid project was based on LFD With Other Firms: 12 Years Education Design Engineer, Lafayette Bridge over the Mississippi River, St. Paul, Minnesota (2008-2010): Performed the preliminary engineering MS/1991/Civil Engineering with phase for replacement of the Lafayette Bridge (TH-52) over the emphasis in Structures/University Mississippi River. The replacement bridge consists of parallel structures of South Florida each 3210 feet long with a maximum mainspan length of 362 feet. BS/1989/Civil Engineering / Prepared the preliminary design plans for two alternatives; precast University of South Florida segmental concrete box girders and steel box girders. During final design Registration/Certification responsible for the peer review and independent analysis for the Professional Engineer segmental alternative. 1997/Florida/#52061 Design Engineer, Ironton-Russell Bridge over the Ohio River, Ohio 1999/Arizona/#33653 DOT, Ironton, Ohio (2008-2010): Performed the preliminary design 2000/Utah/#3083617-2202 and Independent Longitudinal Analysis for a three span cable stayed 2008/Ohio/#73384 bridge with spans lengths of 370’-900’-370’ and an overall width of 45’-8”. 2010/California/#77494 Superstructure consists of a cast-in-place concrete edge girder system 2011/Minnesota/#48751 erected in balanced cantilever using form travelers. This design-bid project was based on LRFD. Other Projects

Design Engineer, I-35 Crosstown Project, Minneapolis, Minnesota (2005- 2006)

Engineer of Record, Miami Intermodal Center-Earlington Heights Guideway Structures (MIC-EHT), Miami Dade Transit, Dade County, Florida (2006-2008)

Project Engineer, SR 826/SR 836 (Palmetto Expressway/Dolphin Expressway) Interchange, FDOT District 6, Dade County, Florida (2003- 2005) Scott L. Montgomery, PE Lead Quality Control Check Engineer

Overview Mr. Montgomery has a strong background in bridge design, inspection, load rating analyses, and construction-phase services for structures in both steel and concrete. He has also served as the Tampoa Bridge group quality control manager, responsible for quality training and quality audits. Typical projects are described below. Project Specific Experience Areas of Expertise Bridge Analysis and Design Senior Structural Engineer, Denton County Transit Authority Independent Technical Reviews Commuter Rail Project, Denton County, Texas (2008-2009): Quality Control Responsible for independent technical reviews for all structures of this $310 million, 21-mile regional passenger rail line connecting downtown Years of Experience Denton and Lewisville, Texas, with the Dallas Area Rapid Transit With URS: 24 Years (DART) Light Rail system in nearby Carrollton. This included 40 With Other Firms: 2 Years pedestrian, light rail and heavy rail bridges along the corridor ($5.5 million Education dollar bridge construction cost.). This is a fast-track project with a final schedule of 1-year. The new bridges use a variety of prestressed beams MSE/1987/Structural and culverts. All designs per LRFD and AREMA. Engineering/University of Texas at Austin Senior Structural Engineer, 183A Tollway Design-Build Project, BSCE/1985/Civil Engineering/ Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA), Austin, University of South Florida Texas (2005): Responsible for independent technical reviews of the 22 main-line, ramp and frontage road bridges included in this project. These Registration/Certification structures comprised of prestressed beam superstructures with reinforced 1989/Professional Engineer/ concrete piers founded on drilled shaft foundations. In order to maintain Florida #42006 the desired construction schedule, the design and plans for all these bridge 2001/Professional Engineer/ were completed within a 10-month period. Texas #89028 Senior Structural Engineer, Sunpass Express Lanes Tolling Gantry, Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise, Florida (2004): Provided Quality Control and Independent Technical Reviews in the development and implementation of a signature gantry to facilitate open road tolling along Florida’s Turnpike system. Senior Structural Engineer, Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, New Haven, Connecticut (2002-2003): Responsible for final design of the steel alternate of the extradosed cable stayed bridges (I-95 crossing the Quinnipiac River with an estimated cost of $100 million). The extradosed system is a hybrid design and essentially a marriage between girder and stayed cable systems. With a main span of 515-foot., this will be the first extradosed cable stayed bridge constructed in the United States. The bridge is located in the moderately active seismic region. Additionally, high aesthetic requirements were achieved by the design. Edward Bell, PE Quality Assurance Manager

Overview Mr. Bell is the Tampa office Quality Control Manager. He also is an accomplished bridge design engineer with substantial experience in structural steel, reinforced concrete, and prestressed concrete for both long-span cable-stayed, extradosed, and conventional bridges. Typical projects are described below.

Areas of Expertise Project Specific Experience Bridge Design Quality Manager, URS Tampa Office (2010-Present): Serves as Quality Control overall Quality Control Manager for Tampa office, responsible for coordination and approval of project specific quality control plans, quality Years of Experience training and for performing project quality audits. With URS: 34 Years Project Manager, Sanibel Causeway Rehabilitation and With Other Firms: 4 Years Replacement of Structures B & C, Lee County DOT, Ft. Myers, Education Florida (2003-2009): Managed the project for bridge replacement, MSCE/1970/Civil Engineering/ roadway design, environmental permitting, survey, utility relocation, Stanford University landscaping, drainage, and public information and construction phase services for this $60 million project. Environmental and U.S. Coast BSCE/1968/Civil Engineering/ Guard permits were obtained. Interaction with the local residents Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute through a public involvement and aesthetics task force was included. Registration/Certification Roadway redesign and maintenance of traffic during construction were 1980/Professional Engineer/ part of the project. The project includes 1.1 miles (247,000 square feet) of Florida #28588 bridge structure, 1.1 miles (267,100 square feet) of roadway, 4,100 linear feet of retaining walls, 3,100 linear feet of seawall, as well as drainage ponds and a bike path. Senior Structural Engineer, Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, New Haven, Connecticut (2001-2004): Involved in geometrics, slab and superstructure design and specification preparation for the preliminary and final design of the steel alternate of the extradosed cable stayed bridges. With a main span of 515 feet, this will be the first extradosed cable stayed bridge constructed in the United States. The bridge is located in a moderately active seismic region. Senior Structural Engineer, U.S. Grant Bridge, Portsmouth, Ohio (1999-2000): Involved in the substructure final design of an 875-foot main span concrete cable stayed bridge crossing the Ohio River. The existing abutments were modified and retro fitted to accommodate the new bridge design. Project Engineer, Sunshine Skyway Bridge over the Tampa Ship Channel, FDOT District Seven, Florida: Designed the long-span, high-level, cable-stayed steel alternate. Entailed continuous steel plate girder approaches with span lengths varying from 221 feet to 233 feet. Overall length was 6,700 feet. Project was completed within a stringent nine-month time frame. INFINITY ENGINEERING David L. Jeakle, PE, P. Eng. Principal, Senior Structural Engineer Overview: Mr. Jeakle’s 20-year professional career has been focused on the conceptual development, detailed design and erection engineering for complex and long-span bridge structures. He has been active on a wide variety of bridge projects involving concrete and steel grade separations, segmental concrete structures, and long-span cable-stayed bridges. In addition, his involvement on complex bridge projects includes roles such as technical advisor, value-engineering participant, constructability and peer reviewer. Career Summary: 2011 – Current: Infinity Engineering USA, Inc., Tampa, Florida, USA 2010 – 2011: Infinity Engineering Group, Ltd., North , BC, Canada 1992 – 2010: URS Corporation, Tampa, Florida, USA

Education: MS / 1992 / Civil Engineering / University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL BS / 1990 / Civil Engineering / Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI

Professional Engineer Registrations: FL, CA, NM,MN,OH, MO, TX, WA, BC

Professional Associations: Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) – Voting member of the Stay Cable Committee American Segmental Bridge Institute (ASBI) – Instructor for Precast Balanced Cantilever Construction short course

Relevant Professional Experience: Puyallup Avenue Bridge, Tacoma, Washington, USA (2011-Current) Independent Analysis, Constructability Review and Technical Advisor for the 73 foot wide, two-span cable stayed bridge with span lengths of 404 and 404-feet. The superstructure carries 4-lanes of traffic, 2 sidewalks and is on a 5,200 foot horizontal curve. Superstructure is a concrete edge girder system fabricated from 132 precast segments erected in balanced cantilever. The single A-frame tower is fabricated from steel and is supported on large diameter drilled shafts. The site is in a high seismic region and construction must address 6 active rail lines plus environmentally sensitive areas.

Basoli Bridge over River Ravi, Jammu-Kashmir, India (2011-Current) Engineer of Record for the conceptual development, detailed design and erection engineering for the two-lane, three-span cable stayed highway bridge using a composite steel edge girder system in the 1,150 foot mainspan and concrete edge girder system in the 400 foot long sidespans. The sidespans are cast-in-place on falsework while the mainspan is erected in progressive cantilever from both towers. The modified diamond shaped concrete towers are optimized for seismic demands and reduced construction duration. This is the first cable stayed bridge in India delivered through design-build.

Ironton-Russell Bridge over Ohio River, Ironton, Ohio to Russell, Kentucky, USA (2008-2010) Lead bridge engineer responsible for the conceptual development and final design of the 43 foot wide, three-span concrete cable stayed bridge constructed using the balanced cantilever method with form travellers. Span lengths are 370 ft – 900 ft – 370 ft. Superstructure is a cast-in-place concrete edge girder system erected in balanced cantilever while the concrete towers have a delta shape with two planes of cables.

Pomeroy-Mason Bridge over Ohio River, Pomeroy, Ohio to Mason, West Virginia, USA (2000-2008) Engineer of Record responsible for the conceptual development, final design and construction phase services of the concrete cable-stayed bridge, which uses a cast-in-place concrete edge girder system having span lengths of 244 ft – 675 ft – 244 ft, and an overall deck width of 74 feet. The sidespans were cast-in-place on falsework, while the mainspan was erected in progressive cantilever using form travelers. The concrete towers have a delta shape with two planes of cables and are supported on six 8’-0” diameter drilled shafts with a waterline footing.

Lafayette Bridge over Mississippi River, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA (2008-2010) The Lafayette Bridge replacement consists of two parallel structures each 3,200 feet long, with a maximum span length of 360 feet over the Mississippi River. Performed as the Lead Bridge Engineer during the preliminary design phase to develop two alternative structures: precast segmental concrete box girders and steel box girders. During the final design phase responsible for peer review and independent analysis of the precast segmental alternative which utilized both balanced cantilever and span-by-span methods of construction.

Infinity Engineering USA, Inc. | 2203 N. Lois Ave, Suite 814 | Tampa, FL 33607 | T (813) 466-8118 www.infinity-engineers.com JEFFREY A. GEBHARD, PE Vice President of Engineering/Principal Engineer

As a Vice President of Engineering, Mr. Gebhard is responsible for implementation Education of strategic initiatives and the operation of the Engineering Business Unit. Jeff is B.S., Civil Engineering Iowa State University also responsible for developing project-specific teams and scopes of work to 1997 provide the services our clients need to achieve their geotechnical and construction-related goals. Mr. Gebhard has more than 12 years of geotechnical Professional experience working with owners, contractors and designers. This has given him a Registrations MN Professional Engineer unique perspective and understanding of varying client needs. He has managed No. 41938 dozens of large-scale transportation and deep foundation-related geotechnical projects, employing innovation and a constructibility mindset to reduce risk and IA Professional Engineer No. 19142 provide cost savings for his clients.

WI Professional Engineer Project Experience No. 39955 . I-35W Bridge Design-Build, Minneapolis, MN  Lead Geotechnical Engineer Professional and Geotechnical Project Manager for the Design-Build construction of the Certifications St. Anthony Falls Bridge, carrying 35W over the Mississippi River. Designed and High Strain Dynamic Pile built under an extremely aggressive schedule, Mr. Gebhard oversaw and Testing Certified implemented the geotechnical investigation and analysis for structures and Nuclear Soil Gauge Certified pavements, including the river bridges, numerous retaining walls and secondary structures. He also coordinated and oversaw the drilled shaft load- Professional Affiliations testing program along with field inspection of drilled shaft construction. Deep Foundations Institute . Lowry Avenue, Minneapolis, MN  Lead Geotechnical Engineer and (National Committee Member) Geotechnical Project Manager for the Lowry Avenue Bridge over the Mississippi River. Mr. Gebhard oversaw the geotechnical aspects of a structure design, Minnesota Geotechnical which included a number of structural options. The geotechnical design Society (President 2006-2007) included a number of unique technical complications, including barge-mounted drilling operations, large lateral loading of deep foundations, and innovative American Council of foundation designs. Engineering Companies of Minnesota (Committee . TH61 over the Mississippi River, Hastings, MN  Lead Geotechnical Engineer Member) for the scoping study and preliminary engineering phases, including drafting the geotechnical portion of the RFP. Date of work performed: American Public Works Association (Member) . TH52 over the Mississippi River, “Lafayette Bridge,” St. Paul, MN  Geotechnical Engineer, coordinated literature review and existing deep Minnesota Society of Engineers and Surveyors foundation analysis for a possible retrofit or reconstruction of a major river (Committee Member) crossing. Worked closely with structural engineers to be innovative in the analysis of the bridge foundation. Minnesota Society of Professional Engineers . TH494 and TH61 “Wakota Bridge”, Newport, MN  Geotechnical Engineer, in (Committee Member) charge of geotechnical project management and recommendations for six bridges on differing foundation systems, multiple retaining walls and peer review of the “Wakota” Bridge river crossing geotechnical investigation and foundation recommendations. Daniel A. Duzan, PE Electrical Engineer

Overview Mr. Duzan’s work history consists of 23 years of experience in electrical Professional Registrations engineering and control systems. He leads the inspection, engineering PE/IL/062-059108/2006 and design of electrical distribution, lighting, MEP and control systems PE/WI/38846-006/2007 for movable bridges, roadways and structures. In addition, Mr. Duzan PE/IN/10707714/2007 assists clients with diagnosing problems electrical, mechanical and PE/MN/47782/2009 hydraulic systems. His background includes programming and designing Certified URS Project Manager systems using the following PLCs: Allen Bradley Control Logix, PLC5 and SLC; Square D Symax and Quantum; Siemens Simatic; GE 90-30, Areas of Expertise 90-70 and series 6; Koyo PLC Direct. SCADA software packages include Roadway and Area Lighting RSView, Wonderware, Panelview, Panelmate and various versions of GE Movable Bridge Electrical Controls and Square D. He has also designed and commissioned various AC and Industrial Control Systems DC drives, including servo systems from Westinghouse, Cutler-Hammer, Motor Drives Allen Bradley, Square D, Reliance, Hubbel and Fincor. He uses the Airport Electrical AGI32 photometric software for lighting applications. MEP

Project Experience Education MnDOT - Stillwater Lift Bridge – Stillwater, WI – Task leader for BS/Electrical Engineering/1988/ electrical inspection and condition assessment reports to stabilize and University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign preserve the bridge in accordance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The bridge includes a single motor driven Waddell & Harrington style vertical lift span and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Design plans were developed to modify the control and lighting systems to convert the bridge from a vehicular to a pedestrian/bike path bridge. WisDOT – USH 41 Freeway Interchange Lighting – Brown County, WI: Designed Electrical and Lighting systems for three steel box girder flyover structures for a new freeway system interchange on reconstructed USH 41 in Brown County, WI. The three structures include ones for the primary directional radial ramps of STH 29 EB to 41 NB, USH 41 NB to 29 WB, and USH 41 SB to 29 WB. The design included electrical service sizing and coordination, main and sub distribution panel design, electrical raceway and cable sizing, and convenience receptacle design. Designed lighting of curved, steel box girders using heavy duty industrial light fixtures suitable for damp locations. Prepared final plans, specifications, and construction cost estimates. Performed Lighting Calculations using AGI32 lighting software, cable and conduit routing, voltage drop calculations, electrical circuit load calculations, panelboard schedules, plan preparation, estimate of quantities, and specifications. WisDOT - STH 172 Fox River Bridge Lighting – Green Bay, WI: Designed new roadway lighting system for a six lane bridge over the Fox River in Green Bay, WI. The project included photometric and voltage drop calculations and design plans and specifications for conduit and cable schedules, navigation channel lights, fiber optic conduit, electric service and a lighting controller. IDOT - Route 59 Pedestrian Bridge – Naperville, IL: Prepared lighting and new electrical service plans for a new Pedestrian Bridge over Route 59 in Naperville. Templates were used to layout the location of the light poles and Excel spreadsheets to size conductors and based on loads and voltage drops. WVDOT - I-64 Lighting Project – Charleston, WV: Assisted and prepared the lighting plans for Interstate 64 in Charleston, WV. The lighting design was performed on a 3.5 mile stretch of improvements, which included the layout, circuit design, existing controller modifications, new controller layout and design and voltage drop calculations. Lighting design and layout was also prepared for 2100’ long, concrete box girder maintenance lights, GFCI receptacles, navigation lights, underpass lights and sign lights. IDOT - Eldorado Streetscape – Decatur, IL: Designed new streetlights for half mile stretch of street in downtown Decatur. Photometric calculations were performed at each intersection and sections of roadway between intersections to meet current RP-8-00 Roadway Lighting requirements. New poles with a clamshell base were designed to replicate the landscape architects design. The system included new lighting controllers, conductors and metal halide lights. Craig Johnson, PE Fast Facts Hydraulics Engineer Years of Experience Mr. Johnson has more than 14 years of experience in transportation, water 14 resources, municipal engineering, and surveying. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Education  Anoka County – CSAH TH14 Design Build. Drainage Verification for the B.S., Civil Engineering, Anoka County Oversight team, which included coordination with Anoka University of Minnesota County, cities of Coon Rapids and Blaine, Mn/DOT, BNSF Railroads, Coon Creek Watershed District, and the design and construction team. This 3- Registrations mile long project involved updating the existing road to a double lane highway within one construction season. Professional Engineer, MN  Metropolitan Council – Central Corridor Light Rail Transit. Managed survey team for right of way and field surveying and helped prepare and Hardware/Software coordinate utility and general civil work for 9-mile urban corridor in Proficiencies Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN. Involved coordination with both cities, Hennepin and Ramsey County, the University of Minnesota, Mn/DOT, and GeoPAK the Metropolitan Council with various civil, survey, and Right of Way related issues. MicroStation  Mn/DOT – TH 212 Advanced Design. Managed hydraulic and hydrologic  design for two of three segments of the preliminary design phase for Trunk Autodesk Land Desktop Highway 212 extension from Chaska to Norwood Young America, MN. Autodesk AutoCAD  Mn/DOT – I-494 Design/Build Expansion. Prepared roadway drainage design for I-494 design/build reconstruction and expansion for 11-mile segment from Eden Prairie to Minnetonka, MN. This required coordination with the Mn/DOT for the highway sections and with the local cities for adjacent road connections and crossings.  City of Moorhead – Railroad Grade Separation. Managed design team that prepared roadway drainage design for Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad and Main/21st/22nd Streets Grade Separation Project in Moorhead, MN.  Mn/DOT – Trunk Highway 212 Expansion. Managed design team for Trunk Highway 212 design/build expansion project for five miles of Trunk Highway and local roads from Eden Prairie to Chaska, MN.

 Metropolitan Council – Hiawatha Light Rail Transit Design and Construction. Prepared preliminary and final civil/site, drainage, utility and pavement marking plans for 12-mile light rail transit line in Minneapolis, MN.

 City of St. Paul – Raspberry Island Revetment. Prepared feasibility engineering study and construction cost estimate for $4 million riprap revetment of Raspberry Island in the Mississippi River at downtown St. Paul, MN.

Rani Engineering, Inc. 2912 Anthony Lane  Minneapolis, MN 55418  Phone: (612) 455-3322  Fax: (612) 455-3321  www.rani.com Allison Leigh O’Toole 3801 Aldrich Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55409  612.819.3889  [email protected] Professional Experience Himle Rapp & Company, Inc., Minneapolis, MN February 2012 - present Director Manage client accounts and staff. Develop strategic communication plans, advise clients on execution, and manage implementation. Assist partners in business development.

Office of U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar, Minneapolis, MN 2011 State Director Managed four offices and 17 staff. Recruited and hired employees, evaluated personnel and assigned workload. Formalized office processes and procedures. Managed and directed community relations with constituency groups and thousands of individual constituent cases annually. Responded to media requests and serve as the Senator’s Minnesota spokesperson on various high profile issues. Represented the Senator at events and meetings, often involving high level officials and executives. Communicated the Senator’s policy initiatives to a wide variety of audiences.

Carver County Attorney’s Office, Chaska, MN 2007 – 2010 Chief Deputy County Attorney Managed 30 staff, including 14 attorneys. Recruited, hired and evaluated personnel. Assigned cases, ensured smooth operational workflow and developed $2.8 million annual budget. Assisted in negotiating labor agreements. Managed and directed legislative, media and public relations on behalf of the County Attorney. Served as legal counsel to the county board, county human resources department and sheriff’s office. Developed office and countywide policies.

Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN 2002 – 2007 Assistant County Attorney, 2003 – 2007, Law Clerk, 2002 – 2003 Charged and prosecuted all levels of juvenile crime. Specially assigned to prosecute Criminal Sexual Conduct cases and various gang cases, including two multi-defendant gang homicides. Argued numerous trials to verdict. Represented the County Attorney at public gatherings including National Night Out, Citizens’ Police Academy graduations, and City Council meetings.

Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Department of Education & 1999 – 2001 Minnesota Smoke-Free Coalition, St. Paul, MN Community Relations Coordinator Lobbied for, managed, organized and mobilized various multi-million dollar statewide health-related campaigns and special projects, including Target Market, a youth tobacco prevention initiative.

Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, St. Paul, MN 1994 – 1998 Scheduler, Consumer Information Specialist

Education and Licensing Juris Doctor, William Mitchell College of Law, St. Paul, MN Bachelor of Arts, Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, PA Minnesota Supreme Court  U.S. District Court - Minnesota  U.S. Court of Appeals - Eighth Circuit Theodore von Rosenvinge IV, P.E., D.GE Senior Principal

EXPERIENCE AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION

GeoDesign, Inc., NY/CT/VT - 2/95 to Present • Geotechnical Engineering Berger, Lehman Associates, P.C., NY - 5/92 to 1/95 • Constructibility Review GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. – Boston & CT 7/80 to 4/92 • Foundation Engineering T.W. Lambe (MIT) 1979-80, other firms - 2 years 1975-78 co-op • Soil and Rock Mechanics Composite Construction 1973-1975 • Deep Foundations/Excavation

EDUCATION: M.S., 1980, Civil Engineering (geotechnical specialization), MIT, B.S., 1978, Civil Engineering, Northeastern University, M.B.A., 1993, University of Connecticut (Finance)

PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION: 1984 Civil Engineering: ME, also MA, CT, NY, VT, NJ (pending), LEED AP BD+C, ASCE Diplomate Geotechnical Engineer (2009)

PROFESSIONAL: ASCE Fellow (1998),The Moles, Past Pres. ACEC/CT & ASCE CT Section

EXPERIENCE:

Geotechnical engineer with thirty five years of experience from geo-field engineer to principal in the responsible charge of 100’s of projects involving foundation engineering for bridges, rail facilities, and marine projects. Co-founder of GeoDesign, Inc. consulting firm with over thirty employees in 3 offices (CT/VT and Manhattan)specializing in geotechnical, geostructural and construction engineering. Over a dozen publications and many presentations on deep foundations, ground improvement and underground construction. Selected projects include:

I-95 Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge Replacement, New Haven, CT ($500 million) - geotechnical consultant for new cable-stayed Extradosed Bridge (under construction) over New Haven Harbor/Quinnipiac River. 8 foot diameter drilled shafts to 200 feet. 110 foot long 20 inch precast friction piles for approach viaduct. $2 million design phase pile load testing program. O- Cell tests of rock sockets maximized design factors & reduced socket lengths during construction.

Tappan Zee Bridge, Hudson River, NY – pre-bid geodesign consulting to contractor for $20 million pile load testing program (2012) bid. Develop friction values for 300’- 3’ dia. pipe piles.

I-40 Bridge Over Wolf River, Memphis, TN - Expert Witness/Consultant to Tennessee Department of Transportation – evaluate claim due to contractor’s pier cofferdam problems

Oak Point Link Rail Viaduct, Harlem River - South Bronx, NY. ($300 million 2012 dollars) Geoengineer-in-charge for design/construction of a 2 mile rail link connecting freight yards. Single track viaduct just above river on 36 inch and 72 inch diameter concrete filled steel pipe piles over 100 feet below river. Member Partnering Steering Committee – NYSDOT’s 1st partnered project.

I-95 Moses Wheeler Bridge Replacement, Stratford/Milford, CT ($120 million) - geotechnical consultant for design of 10 foot diameter, cased shafts up to of 60 feet deep with 9.5 foot diameter rock sockets. Design phase StatNamic testing program performed. O-Cell testing.

Expert Witness/Consultant to Connecticut Department of Transportation - Tomlinson Bridge Foundations - technical assistance/expert witness consultation for 120-million $ claim including review of drilled shaft rock socket installation DSC claim and analysis of cofferdam collapse.

 Page 1 GeoDesign, Inc., 984 Southford Road, Middlebury, CT 06762 David H. Barkin, aia, leed ap principal David Barkin is a Principal of JCJ Architecture and an expert in the delivery of complex projects for both public and private clients. David has successfully led a wide variety of projects during his career ranging from new construction to award-winning renovation and restoration work. His keen attention to detail and ability to complete projects on budget and on schedule has created long-standing relationships with repeat clients such as Yale University, St. Joseph College, and the New Haven Public Schools. As a team leader he has earned the respect of his colleagues as a talented manager and mentor to younger experience architects. Beyond project work David is committed to public service and has served on a 26 years number of boards including his current position as Facilities Committee Chair and Board of Education Member in Woodbridge, CT. education select project experience Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute pearl harbor memorial bridge, new haven, connecticut (completion 2014) Bachelor of Architecture David Barkin chaired the advisory committee which addressed critical design issues and

Duke University acted as a public outreach conduit on this major highway replacement bridge project Bachelor of Arts along interstate 95. The replacement bridge will double the traffic capacity along this critical north / south transportation corridor. The design of the new bridge is the first of registration its kind in the United States, an extradosed cable stay bridge. The construction value of Registered Architect in CT, MA, NJ, NY the bridge is in excess of $1B when the approaches and related interchanges are included. Registered Interior Designer in CT The first half of the construction will begin to carry traffic during the summer of 2012. National Council of Architectural farmington river bridge, farmington, connecticut (completed 2010) Registrations Boards (NCARB) Certified This replacement bridge along route 4 in Farmington Connecticut incorporated aspects of context sensitive design by introducing pedestrian friendly features such as a walking path Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Accredited Professional 2.0 (LEED BD+C) and overlook over the Farmington River, decorative lighting, and custom handrail design along with sensitive development of masonry coursing along the abutments. This bridge memberships is regularly recognized by State and local authorities as an example of improved roadway American Institute of Architects (AIA) aesthetics along a secondary state highway. bridge over the cayahoga river, cleveland, ohio (2005 unbuilt) ISPE – National Committee Member – Board Member, New England Region David Barkin, collaborating as bridge architect working for URS developed multiple concepts for a major replacement bridge at the Cayahoga viaduct along route 90. Together service with URS David developed multiple bridge options including a cable stay concept, an Architectural Licensing Board, extradosed concept, a tied arch and a design. State of CT new mississippi river bridge at st. francisville, louisiana (2005 unbuilt) Building Committee Chair, David Barkin served as bridge architect working for URS on this major replacement Woodbridge, CT bridge competition. The URS design, though not realized, offered a single slender mast with traffic passing between the cables on either side of the mast. This solution was both Vice Chair, Board of Education, Woodbridge, CT elegant and economical and would have offered the traveler a fantastic experience when traveling along route 10 from St. Francisville to New Roads. public outreach – public projects (1995 – present) In the execution of over a dozen public school and municipal projects during the past 17 years David is often the lead representative from the design team in organizing public input through public presentations, design charrettes and small group interviews. Work in multiple school districts has led to a keen ability to develop consensus between constituencies that are sometimes in conflict with one another before his involvement. David K. Cabage, CCC Cost Estimator/Scheduler

Overview Mr. Cabage is experienced in cost estimating and scheduling for all types of projects undertaken by our firm’s Tampa operations. Estimates involve all Construction Specifications Institute divisions from conceptual plans through finish, including change orders and claims. He is proficient in the use of most estimating and scheduling software (i.e., Timberline Estimating and Job Costing, Primavera, Microsoft Project). Project types Areas of Expertise have included highways, bridges, airports, transit, rail, ports, and mixed- use complexes. Cost Estimating and Scheduling Years of Experience Project Specific Experience With URS: 23 Years Chief Estimator, CR 296 (Roosevelt Blvd.), FDOT District Seven, With Other Firms: 5 Years Pinellas County, Florida: Responsible for providing preliminary and Education final cost estimate for a major corridor connector in Pinellas County. Work included significant grade-separated roadway with at grade frontage BS/1986/Building Construction/ roads, an urban interchange, and flyover bridges. Approximate University of Florida construction value was $126.0 million. Registration/Certification Chief Estimator, District Wide Interstate Program Management, 1993/Certified Cost Consultant/ FDOT District Seven, Florida: In this role, duties include providing Association for the Advancement original planning/budget estimates, review of other design consultants of Cost Engineers International estimates, and input for constructability issues for this multi-discipline (aace®)/#1260 contract providing as-needed services to support the FDOT work program as it relates to all Interstate highway improvements in the five- county District in the Tampa Bay area. This contract includes more than 35 miles of I-275, I-4, and I-75, all of which are in various stages at improvement. Services include PD&E, design, design reviews, permitting, public involvement, utility coordination, design coordination, and staging studies. Chief Estimator, US 281/LOOP 1604 Coordination with TxDOT District Offices & FHWA, Texas: Responsible for an FHWA review of our previous cost estimate based on “Mega Project” status. Scope of services included assisting TxDOT in support of completing a risk assessment with FHWA staff. Issues addressed included project size and scope relative to local market conditions, equipment, materials and labor availability, and risk of quantity or unit price overruns/underruns. Approximate construction value was $2.7 billion. Chief Scheduler, I-35W/TH62 CPM Schedule, MnDOT: Scope of services included producing a detailed CPM schedule to establish contract duration and a detailed CPM specification for bidding purposes. The project consisted of 6 precast segmental and 28 precast girder bridges, at grade and grade separated roads to eliminate weaving problems, large amounts of retaining walls, deep storm sewer trunk lines, and ITS infrastructure. Approximate construction value was $288.0 million. Required Forms Required Forms Required