B08_Solicitation_Attachment_4_Drawings_Specifications_C_41640-00116__2023_INSPECTION_FULL_REPORT_7_18_26_(37_pgs).pdf

BRIDGE INSPECTION AND APPRAISAL REPORT

TRAM-LIGHTHOUSE ROAD

Bridge Number: 41640-00116

St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge

Region 4

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Type of Inspection: Routine

Date of Inspection: 5/29/2023

Prepared By: Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc

Prepared For: National Wildlife Refuge System Infrastructure Management Division Falls Church, VA

Date of Report: 7/18/2023

Type of Report: Full

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

41640 00116 7/18/2023 Rpt V4.2.1

Bridge Identification, Use, & Summary of Findings

225 Date of Report 7/18/2023

090 Inspection Date 5/29/2023

Inspector Organization Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc

Lead Inspector David Barber, P.E.

The summary condition of the bridge is GOOD.

There are no object markers at the corners of the bridge. There is a 10" 12" drop at the downstream end of the concrete slab under the bridge and up to 6" drop at the upstream end of the concrete slab under the bridge. The timber curbs and bridge rail are loose at all bolted connections.

226 Type Use The bridge provides FWS access in the east portion of the refuge. The one lane bridge carries two way traffic. There is a locked gate just east of the bridge.

213 Public Use N 030 Year of ADT 23

029 Average Daily Traffic 000001212 In Use Y

209 Type Construction/Materials Reinforced concrete deck and girders poured monolithically, on concrete piers and abutments.

108 Wearing Surface Monolithic Concrete

107 Deck Str Type Concrete Cast in Place

106 Year Rebuilt 2000

052 Deck Width 015.0

051 Bridge Roadway Width 014.0

049 Structure Length 000034

048 Max Span Length 0011

045 Number of Main Spans 003

043 Structure Type Concrete Continuous Tee Beam

027 Year Built 1942

265 Asset Number 10015314

204 Bridge Number 41640 00116

203 Bridge Name TRAM LIGHTHOUSE ROAD

009 Location TRAM ROAD/LIGHTHOUSE ROAD

007 Facility Carried TRAM ROAD

006 Feature Intersected CANAL TO STONEY BAYOU

003 County 129 (Wakulla County)

001 State 124 (Florida)

201 Region 4202 Station St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge

Summary of Findings

Bridge Use

Bridge Features

Bridge Identification & Location ft, xxx.x ft, xxx.x xxx ft, xxxxxx ft, xxxx xxxxxx yy

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

Recommended Work & Estimated Costs Estimated Remaining Life (Item 219, Years): >10 (At current load limits without major repairs or rehabilitation)

ReplacementMaint/Repair/ Rehab

Priority Assessment

Recommendation (See Footnote 1)Item

Urgent Item j.

i.

h.

g.

f.

e.

d.

c.

b.

a.

Future Year Cost:

$890

Current Year Cost:

$808

Proj Total for Year of Est:

$370

Subtotal: $370

G.A.S.

Construction Management:

Preliminary Design

Planning/ Design/ Const. Mgmt:

Construction Contingency:

Construction Estimate:

$370

$8084Install signs in accordance with 'Sign Recommendations' in the next section of this report. 2 OM-3L and 2 OM-3R object markers. Material: $250, Labor: 4 Hours at $30/hour = $120, Adjustment for Location: None

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

ReplacementMaint/Repair/ Rehab

Priority Assessment

Recommendation (See Footnote 1)Item

Urgent Item j.

i.

h.

g.

f.

e.

d.

c.

b.

a.

Future Year Cost:

$2,871

Current Year Cost:

$2,604

Proj Total for Year of Est:

$1,450

Subtotal: $1,450

G.A.S.

Construction Management:

Preliminary Design

Planning/ Design/ Const. Mgmt:

Construction Contingency:

Construction Estimate:

$1,450

$2,6045Place riprap at upstream and downstream ends of concrete slab under bridge. Material and Labor: 10 cubic yards at $145 = $1,450, Adjustment for Location: None.

Urgent Item j.

i.

h.

g.

f.

e.

d.

c.

b.

a.

Future Year Cost:

$475

Current Year Cost:

$431

Proj Total for Year of Est:

$240

Subtotal: $240

G.A.S.

Construction Management:

Preliminary Design

Planning/ Design/ Const. Mgmt:

Construction Contingency:

Construction Estimate:

$240

$4315Tighten bolts at curbs and bridge rail connections. Install shims in post pockets to tighten rail post support. Labor: 8 hours at $30/hour = $240, Adjustment for Location: None

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

ReplacementMaint/Repair/ Rehab

Priority Assessment

Recommendation (See Footnote 1)Item

Urgent Item j.

i.

h.

g.

f.

e.

d.

c.

b.

a.

Future Year Cost:

$50

Current Year Cost:

$45

Proj Total for Year of Est:

$45

Subtotal: $45

G.A.S.

Construction Management:

Preliminary Design

Planning/ Design/ Const. Mgmt:

Construction Contingency:

Construction Estimate:

$45

$451Trim vegetation obstructing view of west approach load posting sign. Material: $0, Labor: 1 hour at $45/hour = $45, Adjustment for Location: None

Footnotes:

1/Recommended work are items noted by the inspection team on the date of inspection. Urgent items are those which pose a current threat to the strength or stability of the bridge, or involve a significant safety concern. Items are listed in their order of importance. Item 1 considered most important. Adjustments for location include geographical region and remoteness of the bridge adjustment. For multi-use structures such as water control structures or dam spillways, repair or reconstruction estimates, if applicable, are for the bridge component only.

2/Item c., when needed, is used for items up to $100,000 in construction value, except replacements, and includes a mark-up of approximately 18% assuming MMS program accomplishment. If the item is accomplished by other than MMS, the mark-up should be adjusted accordingly.

3/Items d. and e., when needed, are used for replacements, and work items over $100,000 in construction value, and use a sliding scale based on the construction estimate. If the item is accomplished by MMS, the mark-up should be adjusted accordingly.

4/Priority assessment value is a reflection of the criticality of a recommendation, with a value of 1, 2, or 3 representing a high priority safety hazard that requires immediate attention, and a 7 representing a non-urgent repair with little-or-no safety ramifications.

$3,888Totals

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

159.3

49.3

49.355.9

T3 3

T3S2

T3

HS20 35.1

303 Sign Recommendation Remarks

302 Sign Status Weight Limit 15 Tons signs at both approaches. Object markers are not in place.

301 Sign Recommendations No load posting required. Object markers are recommended at all corners of the bridge.

Tee GirderDeckElement

The load rating from 2001 is still considered valid. No significant changes in the condition of the bridge which would affect the rating were observed during the 2023 inspection. The load capacity and weight limit posting recommendations remain as shown above.

306 Rating Verified By David Barber, 5/29/2023305 Rating Prepared By Jason Triplett, 4/30/2001

304 Load Rating Remarks DECK: 6" thick flanges of tees with no asphalt or fill. Stresses Used: Concrete Compressive Stress = 3,000 psi, Reinforcing Steel Yield Stress = 60,000 psi. TEE GIRDER: 6" thick concrete slab on 5 integral concrete stems continuous over 3 spans.

Spans = 11' 0", 11' 0", 11' 0". Stems are 1' 2" wide, 15 3/4" deep. 3' 0" spacing at interior and 2' 7" spacing at exterior.

Stresses Used: Concrete Compressive Stress = 3,000 psi, Reinforcing Steel Yield Stress = 40,000 psi.

Project leaders (and others) should be aware that the posting recommendations are for the absolute maximum load levels to which a structure may safely be subjected for limited passages of the loads. Should the need arise to subject the bridge to sustained loading at or near this level, the Project Leader should contact the Regional Engineer for guidance regarding an appropriate safe load capacity.

Load posting recommendations are based on Operating rating values. See note regarding posting recommendations, below.

Op = Operating RatingIn = Inventory Rating

Important Note Regarding Posting Recommendations

Load Ratings (Tons)

Sign Recommendations

Sign Recommendations & Load Ratings

In In In In InOp Op Op Op Op

310 Element 1 320 Element 2 330 Element 3 340 Element 4 350 Element 5

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

Additional Information & Comments

211 Description of Bridge The bridge was constructed in approximately 1942 and reconstructed in 2000, and consists of three spans of reinforced concrete girders constructed monolithically with a reinforced concrete deck. The spans are supported on concrete wall piers and abutments. There is a concrete slab under the bridge. The bridge also serves as a water control structure.

255 Comparison to Previous Inspection There are no significant changes in the condition of the bridge since the previous inspection.

256 Next Inspection Recommendations The next inspection for this bridge is recommended as a routine inspection with a check report in two years.

257 Additional Comments

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

Condition Ratings (Items 218, 58, 59, 60) Code Condition Description

N Not applicable

9 Excellent

8 Very Good No problems noted.

7 Good Some minor problems noted.

6 Satisfactory Structural elements show some minor deterioration.

5 Fair All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling, or scour.

4 Poor Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling, or scour.

3 Serious Loss of section, deterioration, spalling, or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

2 Critical Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support.

Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.

1 Imminent Failure Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in light service.

0 Failed Out of service; beyond corrective action.

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

218 Approaches Item Condition

Rating Remarks

218 Approaches 7

218.01 Approach Slab 7

218.02 Relief Joints N

218.03 Approach Guardrail N

218.04 Surfacing 7

218.05 Embankment 7

218.06 Signs 7

218.07 Vegetation 7

Sloped approach slabs at both ends, covered with asphalt at west, ramped with gravel at east.

Gravel, grass between wheel lines beyond east end, concrete slab covered with asphalt paving at west. Transverse crack in asphalt 2' from west end of bridge (at end of approach slab).

Retained by flared wingwalls.

'One Lane Bridge' sign at east approach on left shoulder. Posted 'Weight Limit 15 Tons' at both approaches. West sign is on left side of road and obscured by overhanging vegetation.

Grassy slopes recently trimmed.

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

058 Deck

Rating Remarks

058 Deck 7

058.01 Deck Structure 7

058.02 Expansion Joints N

058.03 Wearing Surface 7

058.04 Rideability 8

058.05 Curbs 6

058.06 Parapets/Railings 6

058.07 Drains/Drainage 7

058.08 Cleanliness 7

058.09 Utilities N

058.10 Lighting N

Reinforced concrete monolithic with girders Plywood deck forms remain in place between girders. Insignificant transverse crack with light efflorescence.

Concrete Insignificant longitudinal crack along the bridge centerline and a few other short longitudinal insignificant cracks.

Treated timber curbs bolted to deck Minor to moderate checks. Not firmly attached to the bridge. Minor rot in northwest curb, attachment bolts are no longer holding in.

Treated timber rail and posts bolted to treated timber curbs Leaning slightly at southwest. Attachments of posts to curbs are loose. Minor damage to lower rail at northwest corner.

Through spaces in curbs water ponded on deck (in 2021).

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

059 Superstructure

Rating Remarks

059 Superstructure 7

059.01 Bearing Devices N

059.02 Girders 7

059.02A Diaphragms N

059.02B Bracing N

059.03 Floor Beams N

059.04 Stringers N

059.05 Trusses N

059.05A Portals N

059.05B Bracing N

Reinforced concrete tee beams poured monolithically with deck. North exterior tee beam does not bear fully on pier walls (walls not widened when bridge was widened).

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

059 Superstructure (cont)

Rating Remarks

059.06 Paint N

059.07 Splices and Connections N

059.08 Rivets & Bolts N

059.09 Welds N

059.10 Corrosion N

059.11 Timber Decay N

059.12 Deflection 8

059.13 Vibration Under Load 8

059.14 Collision Damage N

No deflection observed in 2023.

No vibration observed in 2023.

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

RemarksCondition Rating

Item

060 Substructure

060 Substructure 7

060.01 Wings 6

060.02 Backwalls/Bulkheads 7

060.03 Bearing Seats 7

060.04 Breastwalls/Columns 7

060.05 Weep Holes N

060.06 Footings/Sills N

060.07 Piles/Bracing N

060.08 Erosion/Scour 7

060.09 Settlement N

Concrete, flared Minor to moderate surface Minor spalling.

Concrete Minor surface spalling and abrasion.

Concrete beams bear on tops of concrete abutments.

Concrete Minor surface spalling and abrasion.

Concrete slab under bridge.

ABUTMENTS

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

RemarksCondition Rating

Item

060 Substructure (cont)

060.10 Bearing Seats 7

060.11 Caps N

060.12 Columns/Walls 7

060.13 Piles/Bracing N

060.14 Footings/Sills N

Concrete beams bear on tops of concrete pier walls.

Concrete Minor surface spalling and abrasion. Deterioration of matrix has exposed larger aggregate.

060.15 Erosion/Scour 7

060.16 Settlement N

Concrete slab under bridge.

PIERS

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

Condition Ratings (Item 61 Channel) Code Description

N Not applicable. Bridge is not over a waterway.

9 There are no noticable or noteworth deficiencies which affect the condition of the channel.

8 Banks are protected or well vegetated. River control devides such as spur dikes and embankment protection are not required or are in a stable condition.

7 Bank protection is in need of minor repairs. River control devices and embankment protection have a little minor damage. Banks and/or channel have minor amounts of drift.

6 Bank is beginning to slump. River control devices and embankment protection have widespread minor damage.

There is minor stream bed movement evident. Debris is restricting the channel slightly.

5 Bank protection is being eroded. River control devices and/or embankment have major damage. Large deposits of debris are in the channnel.

4 Bank and embankment protection is severely undermined. River control devices have severe damage. Large deposits of debris are in the channel.

3 Bank protection has failed. River control devices have been destroyed. Stream bed aggradation, degradation or lateral movement has changed the channel to now threaten the bridge and/or approach roadway.

2 The channel has changed to the extent the bridge is near a state of collapse.

1 Bridge closed because of channel failure. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0 Bridge closed because of channel failure. Replacement necessary.

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

061 Channel and Channel Protection

Rating Remarks

061 Channel & Channel Protection

061.01 Scour/Erosion 7

061.02 Channel Protection 6

061.03 Spur Dikes/Jetties N

061.04 Waterway

Obstructions

061.05 Adequacy of Opening 7

061.06 Normal Velocity 6

060.17 Average Opening 7

060.18 Stream Bed Material 7

061.05 Adequacy of Opening Sufficient

061.06 Normal Velocity Medium

Downstream end of concrete slab exposed up to 12".

Cobble size riprap across channel at downstream (south) side of concrete slab.

Stoplogs on upstream side (north). Widening of superstructure prevents access to stoplogs from above.

Velocity is sufficient to cause minor scour. Flow and reverse.

Prior noted scour at downstream end was not visible with riprap.

Sand, silt and rocks.

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

Condition Ratings (Item 62 Culverts) Code Description

N Not applicable. Structure is not a culvert.

9 No deficiencies.

8 No noticable or noteworty deficiencies which affect the condition of the culvert. Insignificant scrape marks caused by drift.

7 Shrinkage cracks, light scaling, and insignificant spalling which does not expose reinforcing steel. Insignificant damage caused by drift with no misalignment and not requiring corrective action. Some minor scouring has occurred near curtain walls, wingwalls, or pipes. Metal culverts have a smooth symmetrical curvature with superficial corrosion and no pitting.

6 Deterioration or initial disintegration, minor chloride contamination, cracking with some leaching, or spalls on concrete walls, wingwalls, or pipes. Metal curverts have a smooth curvature, non symmetrical shape, significant corrosion or moderate pitting.

5 Moderate to major deterioration or disintegration, extensive cracking and leaching, or spalls on concrete or masonry walls and erosion at curtain walls, wingwalls, or pipes. Metal culverts have significant distortion and deflection in one section, significant corrosion or deep pitting.

4 Large spalls, heavy scaling, wide cracks, considerable efflorescence, or opened construction joint permitting loss of backfill. Considerable settlement or misalignment. Considerable scouring or erosion at curtain walls, wingwalls or pipes. Metal culverts have significant distortion and deflection throughout, extensive corrosion or deep pitting.

3 Any condition described in Code 4 but which is excessive in scope. Severe movement or differential settlement of the segments, or loss of fill. Holes may exist in walls or slabs. Integral wingwalls nearly severed from culvert.

Severe scour or erosion at curtain walls, wingwalls or pipes. Metal culverts have extreme distortion and deflection in one section, extensive corrosion, or deep pitting with scattered perforations.

2 Integral wingwalls collapsed, severe settlement of roadway due to loss of fill. Section of culvert may have failed and can no longer support embankment. Complete undermining at curtain walls and pipes. Corrective action required to maintain traffic. Metal culverts have extreme distortion and deflection throughout with extensive perforations due to corrosion.

1 Bridge closed. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0 Bridge closed. Replacement necessary.

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

062 Culverts

Rating Remarks

062 Culvert(s) N

062.01 Embankment

062.02 Surfacing

062.03 Shoulders

062.04 Headwalls

062.05 Wingwalls

062.06 Barrel

062.07 Footings

062.08 Design Opening

062.09 Opening Remaining

062.10 Debris/Silt

062.11 Erosion/Scour

062.12 Grade Percent

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

036 Traffic Safety Features Item Assessment Remarks

036A Bridge Rail 0 Treated timber rail and posts bolted to treated timber curbs.

036B Transitions 0

036C Approach Rail 0

036D End Treatment 0

No approach railing exists.

0 Does not meet current FWS new rail guidelines 1 Meets current FWS guidelines N Not applicable or a safety feature is not required

Traffic Safety Features Legend:

113 Scour Critical Bridges Item Assessment Remarks

113 Scour Critical Bridges 7 Scour Mitigated; POA Implemented. Countermeasures have been installed to mitigate an existing problem with scour and to reduce the risk of bridge failure during a flood event. Instructions contained in a plan of action have been implemented to reduce the risk to users from a bridge failure during or immediately after a flood event. Minor scour 6" to 1' 0 deep at end of concrete slab.

041 Bridge Posting Item Assessment Remarks

041 Bridge Posting P Posted for load (may include other restrictions such as temporary bridges which are load posted). Posting is not required, but bridge was posted Weight Limit 15 tons at both approaches the time of inspection.

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

Structure No. 41640-00116, TRAM-LIGHTHOUSE ROAD Inspec on Date: 5/29/2023

View down centerline of bridge roadway looking east

Eleva on looking upstream

Eleva on looking downstream

‘One Lane Bridge’ sign at east approach

Load pos ng sign at east approach

Load pos ng sign at west approach

Longitudinal and transverse cracks near centerline with branching into centerline of deck

Open joint and se lement at east end of deck

Checks in curbs south shown, similar throughout

Weathered north bridge rail, typical of south bridge rail

Loose curb bolts allowing rail to move, northwest corner shown

Spall in southeast wingwall near end

North exterior girder does not fully bear on west pier

Abrasion in pier near water line similar at all piers and abutments, east face of east pier shown

Typical view of underside of bridge

Upstream channel looking north

Looking east

Downstream channel looking south

Looking west

Inventory & Appraisal Data

209 Type Construction/Materials Reinforced concrete deck and girders poured monolithically, on concrete piers and abutments.

108 Deck Surface 1 Monolithic Concrete

107 Deck Type 1 Concrete Cast in Place

106 Year Rebuilt 2000

052 Deck Width 015.0

051 Br. C C Width 014.0

049 Str. Length 000034

048 Max Span Length 0011

045 No. Main Spans 003

043 Structure Type 204 Concrete Continuous Tee Beam

027 Year Built 1942

265 Asset Number 10015314

204 Bridge Number 41640 00116

203 Bridge Name TRAM LIGHTHOUSE ROAD

009 Location TRAM ROAD/LIGHTHOUSE ROAD

007 Facility Carried TRAM ROAD

006 Feat. Intersected CANAL TO STONEY BAYOU202 Station St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge

Bridge Features

Bridge Identification & Location 201 Region 4

205 FWS Class B

206 FWS Function 4

207 State 124 Florida

208 County 129 Wakulla County

011 Milepoint 000.050

016 Latitude 30° 08.46'

017 Longitude 084° 08.32'

022 Owner 63 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

021 Maint. Resp. 63 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

216 Inv. Length 000032

217 FWS Min. Length Y

112 NBIS Min. Length Y

050 Curb/Walk Lt/Rt 00.0/00.0

032 Approach Width 010

102 Traffic Direction 3 One lane bridge for 2 way traffic

210 Plans Available Y

028 Lanes On/Under 01/00

042 Service On/Under 1/5

044 App. Str. Type NA

046 No. App. Spans 000

047 Horiz. Clearance 14.0 xx.x ft xxxx ft xxxxxx ft xxxxxx ft xx.x ft xxx.x ft xxx.x ft xxx ft

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

226 Type Use The bridge provides FWS access in the east portion of the refuge. The one lane bridge carries two way traffic. There is a locked gate just east of the bridge.

213 Public Use N 030 Year of ADT 23

029 Average Daily 000001212 In Use Y

Condition Ratings & Appraisal Data

Bridge Use

058 Deck Condition Rating 7

059 Superstructure Condition Rating 7

060 Substructure Condition Rating 7

061 Channel Condition Rating 6

062 Culvert Condtion Rating N

113 Scour Critical Bridges 7

218 Approaches Condition Rating 7

227 Bridge Summary Condition 7.2

036 Railing 0000

067 Structural Evaluation 6

068 Deck Geometry 6

069 Underclearance Vertical and Horizontal N

071 Waterway Adequacy 7

072 Approach Alignment 7

219 Estimated Remaining Life >10

Load Rating & Posting 031 Design Load 0

041 Load Posting P

063 Operating Rating Method 2

064 Operating Rating 55

065 Inventory Rating Method 2

066 Inventory Rating 35

070 Bridge Posting 5 Allowable Stress (AS)

Allowable Stress (AS)

Tons

Tons

Recommended Work 231 Maint/Repair/Rehab Estimated Cost $3,888

232 Replacement Recommended N

233 Replacement Cost

234 Year of Estimated Costs 2023

Posted for load (may include other restrictions such as temporary bridges which are load posted)

Other or Unkown

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

092A Fracture Critical Inspection N090 Inspection Date 5/29/2023

Inspection Information

228 Last Inspection Type Routine

250 Last Report Type Full

091 Inspection Frequency 24

229 Next Inspection Year 2025

230 Next Inspection Type 2

251 Next Report Type Check

092B Requires Underwater Inspec N

092C Requires Special Inspection N

093A Fracture Critical Inspection

093B Underwater Inspection Date

093C Special Inspection Date

223 Lead Inspector David Barber, P.E.

224 Inspector Organization Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc

225 Date of Report 7/18/2023

245 Approved By DMB

246 Approved Date 8/16/2023

Miscellaneous FWS & NBI Data

235 FWS Notes "1999: SCHED FOR REHAB W/98 NEW CNSTRCTN FUNDS. INSPECT. 2001: REPAIRS/REHAB COMPLTD IN

2000 J. POJE 1/01. CANDIDATE FOR CHECK INSP IN 2003

Notes

008 NBI Number 000041640 00021

034 Skew, ° 00

037 Historical Significance 5

075A Type of Work Proposed

075B Work Done By

076 Length of Structure Improvement

094 Bridge Improvement Cost, $1k

095 Roadway Improvement Cost, $1k

096 Total Project Cost, $1k

097 Cost Estimate Year

114 Future ADT 000002

115 Year of Future ADT 43

214 Inspected by Another Agency No

215 Inspection Agency

240 Year Added to Inventory

241 Est. RPI Replacement Cost, $1k 337

242 Year of RPI Estimate 2023

005 State Route Number 160000000

244 TeamMember Organization Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc

243 TeamMember Trevor Jones

PrintDate: 8/18/2023

X:\FJ\F\FWSHQ\157028\0-PROJECT FILES\FORMS & REFERENCE DOCUMENTS\Urgent Item Form V1.3.doc

~U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE~

URGENT BRIDGE WORK

RECOMMENDATION ITEMS

STATION: REGION:

BRIDGE NAME:

BRIDGE NUMBER:

URGENT ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION:

THE ABOVE ITEM(S) WERE FIRST NOTED DURING THE _____________

INSPECTION.

THE BRIDGE REQUIRES POSTING OF TONS, TONS, TONS

FOR AASHTO TRUCK TYPES 3, 3S2, & 3-3, OR TONS FOR A SINGLE

LOAD LIMIT SIGN, BUT WAS NOT POSTED AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION.

THE POSTING RECOMMENDATION IS UNCHANGED FROM THE PREVIOUS

INSPECTION REPORT.

URGENT ITEMS ARE THOSE THAT POSE A CURRENT THREAT TO THE

STRENGTH OR STABILITY OF THE BRIDGE, OR INVOLVE A SIGNIFICANT

SAFETY CONCERN.

INSPECTOR: DATE:

ORGANIZATION:

ACKNOWLEDGED BY: DATE:

TITLE:

Note: Questions regarding this information should be directed to the Bridge Safety Program Manager/Infrastructure Management Division/Ron_Begin@fws.gov/703-358-2354

Original: Station cc: Regional Engineer (Attention Regional Bridge Coordinator) Infrastructure Division (Bridge Safety Program Manager) Inspector

St. Marks NWR 4

TRAM-LIGHTHOUSE ROAD

41640-00116

5/29/2023X

X

David M. Barber, P.E. 6/21/2023

SEH,Inc.

The load posting sign at the west approach is obscured by vegetation. The vegetation needs to be trimmed away from the view of the west approach sign.