Presentation Transcript

1. USH 14 North SegmentTransmission Line Relocation

   Dustin Johanek, Sr. Project Manager
2. Topics Project location and highway relocation conflicts with ATC facilities Final ATC relocation scope and alternatives considered Project photos Project details How did we get here? Cost savings Project takeaways and working with ATC
3. Project Location / Hwy and ATC Conflicts
4. Final ATC Relocation Scope – Crossing 2USH 41 at CN Railroad
5. Final ATC Relocation Scope – Crossing 4USH 41 / I-43 Interchange - South
6. Final ATC Relocation Scope – Crossing 4USH 41 / I-43 Interchange - Center
7. Final ATC Relocation Scope – Crossing 4USH 41 / I-43 Interchange - North
8. Alternative to Crossing 4to Mitigate Wetland Impact
9. Final ATC Relocation Scope – Photos Temporaryline Setting structure on the foundation Structuresetting GuardingUSH 41duringstringing
10. Final ATC Relocation Scope – Photos Rebarcage Vibratoryhammer fortangent structurebases Smooth-walledcasing
11. Project Details Installed 14 structures totaling 6,900’ of new transmission alignment Removed 12 structures Installed two temporary lines 2,700 feet 9 wood poles MJ Electric –13,207 work hours without a safety accident Placed 5,587 mats Deepest foundation is 69’ x 9’ Tallest structure is 140’ Total project cost = $6.3 M ($4.9M reimbursable by DOT)
12. How Did We Get Here?Early Involvement Typically 12-18 months given to plan, engineer, procure and construct a relocation project from the DOT for smaller projects This project took 31 months from authorization of initial funding through demobilization November 2010 - authorization for planning/schedule development June 2011 - early audit agreement was approved for preliminary engineering/project development activities based on preliminary estimate by ATC January 2012 - detailed design started March 2012 - finalized alignment July 2012 - material procurement October 2012 - final easements signed December 2012 - April 2013 construction through in service June 2013 - completed wreck out/mat removal/demob
13. How Did We Get Here?Continuous Communication Multiple Utility Coordination Meetings, 10 in total Kept all parties involved and up-to-date on the project developments throughout the project Reduction of Crossing Conflicts Crossing 1 – No change to grade / No conflict Crossing 3 – No change to grade / No conflict Crossing 5 – Relocation of proposed pond by DOT / No conflict Crossing 6 – Maintain / Lower existing grade / No conflict Location Coordination of Structure 774 GBMSD Installation of flyover ramps and bridge girders
14. How Did We Get Here?Continuous Communication (Continued) Realign the transmission line centerline north of Duck Creek so OSHA clearance can be maintained for DOT bridge inspection and maintenance activities Locate transmission poles out of the future walking path, but still maintain blowout clearance to the edge of the ROW and OSHA clearances to the new ramps for inspections Environmental and Real Estate discussion regarding 6F properties ATC was able to obtain the Draft EIS from the DOT to assist with environmental surveys Continuous schedule discussions DOT Representative at nearly every ATC- MJ Weekly Construction Progress Meeting
15. Cost Savings Identified Estimated cost savings for elimination of scope of work at crossings 5 and 6 = $1.67M Estimated cost avoidance for line alignment optimization through wetlands = $1.15M Total cost savings = $2.82M
16. Project Takeaways and Working with ATC Involve ATC as soon as possible to allow for: Engineering Procurement Easement acquisition Environmental surveys/permits Time-of-year construction Obtain construction mats, if needed Communication Utility coordination meetings Drawing coordination/dissemination If there are updates, what has changed? New DOT ROW boundaries that have been or will be purchased. DOT/ATC maintenance included within the project Weekly construction meetings with DOT representative

17. Questions?