20110023_Information Letter_20110316

- o?z3
B-2500 Merger Team Meeting
March 16, 2011
1:30-4:30pm
Transportation Building Board Room
Agenda
Introductions
11. Update on Wetland/SAV Mitigation - Beth Smyre -
III. Review of Phase I Design-Build Process and Project Status - Rodger Rochelle
IV. Group Q&A - Merger Team can make suggestions and comments or discuss
concerns with all of the Design-Build Teams (DBT)
V. Q&A with Oregon Inlet Constructors - DBT can ask specific questions of the
agencies relating to their proposed design and construction methods, and the
agencies can ask specific questions of the DBT.
VI. Q&A with PCL Civil Constructors- DBT can ask specific questions of the
agencies relating to their proposed design and construction methods, and the
agencies can ask specific questions of the DBT.
VII. Q&A with Skanska USA Civil Southeast- DBT can ask specific questions of the
agencies relating to their proposed design and construction methods, and the
agencies can ask specific questions of the DBT.

March 9, 2011
Mr. David Hering, LG, P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
NCDOT - TPM Unit
1020 Birch Ridge Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
RE: Contract No. C 202185, TIP Project B-2500
The Herbert C. Bonner Bridge Replacement
March 16 Permitting Agencies Meeting - Group
Q&A Session
Dear Mr. Hering,
Skanska USA Civil Southeast Inc
295 Bendix Road, Suite 400
Virginia Beach, VA 23452
Pnone 757420-4140
Fes 757420-3551
wee w .skanska.com
In accordance with your March 3, 2011 correspondence, Skanska USA Civil
Southeast Inc. (Skanska) is providing the appended list of Group Q&A Session
questions for the March 16th Merger Team and Permitting Agencies meeting. For
each question or clarification request, we have attempted to identify the responsible
agency(s). We will also have an additional set of questions to be asked in our one on
one Q&A meeting which follows the Group Session.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Should you have any questions or require
further details and/or clarifications, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
V1 " ?
Mark Apaliski
Estimating Project Executive
MA: sc
Enclosure
NC 12 Replacement of Herbert C. Bonner Bridge March 9, 2011
Contract No.: C 202185
TIP No.: B-2500
Skanska Permitting Agency Questions - March 16, 2011
Questions to be Posed during the Group Q & A Session
1) Per the RFP, a USACE Nationwide # 6 permit is required to perform the specified bent
soil borings, and substructure load testing. Are there any exceptions allowed for the Feb.
15 to October 31 in-water moratorium restrictions in the event these activities need to be
performed within the moratorium time frames in order to support project permit schedule
requirements? USACE ?,, A,,f
2) The RFP, under "Notable Permit Details" in the Environmental SOW, notes an NCDCM
General Permit requirement and possible USCG permitting for the substructure Load
Testing Program, in addition to a USACE NW #6 permit. Please clarify any CAMA and/or
USCG permit requirements with regard to Load Testing and/or soil borings. USCG and
ir.tf" ? ? I e Ia
NCDCM eu2?
3) Will RFP- specified soil boring and load testing requirements be performed under the
current NCDOT Nationwide Permit # 6 or will the DB Team be required to secure it's
own? NCDOT and USACE
4) If required to procure it's own NW # 6 permit, and assuming a complete permit
application, how soon can the DB Team expect to receive the permit after submittal?
USACE t?. `1SV.7s/ 4,-f 5l"/z (" r,--f- 6VI'.4.r
5) The RFP notes that a variance may be required for the CAMA Major Development
Permit. What information will be required in order to make a determination on whether a
variance will be required as a prerequisite to securing the CA/fMA Permit? NC?DCM
No - Ho Ua(l i's /ny / "16S 4Rb? / i 7'I'hZ ?4// Q
6) The RFP (page 212, para. 1) suggests that an approved CAMA permit is a pre-requisite
for the Coast Guard permit,application? Please confirm USCG
yes
7) Will NCDCM issue their permit independent of the USACE 404/NCDWQ 401 permits or
any other permit? NCDCM ,
8) Can one Public Notice suffice for the USACE 404 and Coast Guard permits? USACE
and USCG ?G r F ?o? /aL,q -6-J6.1,1 k, rt. GSC? ?v(??
rSSv? r
9) Does the Coast Guard plan on attending the 4B and 4C meetings? USCG 01
10) Have SAV surveys to-date followed the NOAA protocol? Please provide confirmation
that the RFP- specified SAV Survey performed by the DB Team also needs to follow the
NOAA protocol (not NCDOT protocol). All Permitting Agencies

11) How soon prior to submittal of the Major Permit Application should the RFP- specified
SAV Survey be performed; how current should this data be? All Permitting Agencies
12) Which environmental agencies would like to be present when the DB Team verifies and
ground truths the SAV limits? All Permitting Agencies
(n.i I/ r{t(k vY0/f.rs d?.14*1
f piping plover and sea turtle nesting locations in
13) Are there any specific mapping details 07f,
the Oregon Inlet area over the last 5 years? USFWS and NPS
i'Ll,Jl'rlc ??ncios Gl?«/ dlt,?_7 A?) f )'S G rvecp
14) Please confirm that pile installation and other in-water activities are permissible in the
presence of sea turtles, smalltooth sawfish, and manatees provided the "distance to
mechanical equipment operations" noted in the respective NMFS and USFWS species
protection bulletins, dated March, 2006 and June, 2003, are strictly adhered to. NMFS,
NCDMF, and USFWS h?l/rEn 4,
otLc S-Aw wig/?yvt? iv v?ri
15) Has the NMFS consulted on shortnosed sturgeon, Kemp Ridley turtle, and hawksbill
turtle? If so, where is the concurrence documentation located? NMFS
16) Are current location details (maps, surveys, etc.) of existing utilities, including the marina
water and sewer facilities, available? NPS
1
2
T.I.P. No. B-2500, Dare County - Replacement of the
Herbert C. Bonner Bridge across Oregon Inlet
Advance Questions for the March 16, 2011 Agency Coordination Meeting
March 9, 2011
Submitted by the PCL Team
No. Question
AC-001 All teams will need to start the supplemental subsurface investigations pretty soon after award to have
adequate time to obtain the additional information for designs to be finalized. It is our understanding
from the question session that we cannot operate under the general Nationwide 6 permit nor NCDOT's
NWP N6. What can be done to expedite obtaining the required permit(s)? Can the Department start this
process during the procurement phase? Are there any moratoriums that may affect obtaining this
subsurface information? If so, can the moratoriums be waived or reduced to expedite obtaining the
subsurface information?
AC-002 Will the NWP H6 and CAMA General Permit for the "pre-design phase load test program" require pre-
construction notifications (p. 168 of Draft RFP)? Will the required equipment be allowed to be staged on
or near the project site between the load testing installation and the final construction? (it is expected
that the same construction equipment will have to be mobilized on site for the load test program as will
be used for the final bridge construction)
AC-003 Is there a moratorium on dredge disposal at any of the existing reefs / islands identified as disposal sites?
AC-004 Is there a moratorium on dredge disposal at any new disposal sites (i.e., sites where there is not already
an existing reef or island)?
AC-005 Page 213 of the RFP states "dredging shall be done to a depth of 8 feet". Is this a minimum or maximum
depth?
AC-006 Which agency will work with the Team to determine whether the dredge material is subject to beach
compatibility/sampling rules enforced by the Coastal Resources Commission? When will this
coordination need to take place?
AC-007 What is the status of the bridge demolition and artificial reef coordination?
AC-008 Is there a particular schedule planned for the agency verification of the SAV survey?
AC-009 For how long will the planned SAV survey be considered valid? Or, in other words, how often will SAV
surveys need to be performed? What will be the policies of the agencies with regard to changes -
occurring in SAV or potential SAV locations after the permitting is complete but prior to construction
completion?
AC-010 It is our understanding that NCDOT Hydraulics Unit is coordinating with the agencies concerning the
potential to capture, convey and control storm water runoff from the bridge deck. What is the status of
this coordination?
AC-011 Please provide any information available related to existing utilities, especially the subterranean cable
running under the Oregon Inlet.
AC-012 Will there be any need for a functional assessment of the SAV areas (for mitigation purposes)?
Page 1 of 2
B-2500 Agency Coordination Meeting Advance Questions (Continued) -submitted by the PCL Team, March 9, 2011
No. Question
AC-013 Will there be any accounting for indirect impacts to SAV areas (such as shading)?
AC-014 Will the design-build team be responsible for SAV surveys within the existing bridge corridor (both for
demolition and mitigation purposes)?
Page 2 of 2