Design Product Evaluation Criteria Handbook

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Design Product Evaluation Criteria Handbook Evaluation Criteria for Design products Office of Project Development Procedures 3/15/2013 This handbook is for use in evaluating highway design products during the initiation, preliminary design, and final design phases of a project. This is to be used by core PDT members in identifying and prioritizing issues prior to these becoming problems or risks.

Table of Contents Contents Introduction/Background... 4 Applicability... 5 Project Development Team Members... 5 Product Evaluation... 6 Project Development Team Meeting... 8 Risk Management prior to Ready to List Milestone... 9 Applicability during Project Reviews... 9 Evaluations Guidance... 10 Design Product Evaluation Template... 11 Evaluation Criteria... 12 Overall Criteria... 12 Design Purpose and Need... 13 Design Designs Standards Compliance... 14 Design Optimization... 15 Project Management Cost Management (Page 1 of 4)... 16 Project Management Schedule Management... 20 Project Management Optimization... 21 Structure Design Design Standards Compliance (1 of 2)... 22 Structure Design Optimization... 24 Right of Way Right of Way Minimization & Compliance... 25 Environmental Purpose and Need... 26 Environmental Environmental Commitments, Minimization, & Compliance... 27 Page 2

Office Engineer Construction Contract Standards Compliance (Page 1 of 3)... 28 Construction Protective Features (Page 1 of 2)... 31 Construction Construction Contract Standard Compliance (Page 1 of 2)... 33 Construction Constructible... 35 Structure Construction Constructible (1 of 3)... 36 Traffic Operations Protective Features... 39 Traffic Operations Design Standard Compliance... 40 Traffic Operations Designed to Operate as Planned... 41 Maintenance Protective Features (Page 1 of 2)... 42 Maintenance Maintainable... 44 Planning Purpose and Need (Page 1 of 3)... 45 Planning Designed to Operate as Planned (Page 1 of 4)... 48 Evaluation Criteria Index... 52 Design... 53 Project Management... 56 Structure Design... 58 Right of Way... 60 Environmental... 61 Office Engineer... 65 Construction... 66 Structure Construction... 68 Traffic Operations... 69 Maintenance... 70 Planning... 72 Page 3

Introduction/Background This handbook establishes a framework for implementation of evaluation criteria to improve the quality of design products developed during the project delivery process. Caltrans has historically relied on conformance to standards and practices, and often individual preferences, to define a project s quality. Consistent application of these standards and practices can be problematic given the various expertise and opinions of the product evaluator. By establishing these evaluation criteria, which are based on product outcomes, and referencing these criteria to the actual standards and practices, it is anticipated that a more consistent application of quality evaluation will be achieved. These evaluation criteria were developed by experts within the key functional units who own and must manage the outcomes of design products, essentially Design s partners and customers. It is critical that these partners and key customers form the core of the Project Development Team (PDT) which will guide the project through the delivery process. These PDT members also own the evaluation of those design characteristics which were developed by their respective functional experts. By continuously evaluating the design product utilizing the identified characteristics, risks to project quality will be identified and can be prioritized and resolved in an efficient manner. Page 4

Applicability The project development team (PDT) is encouraged to apply the design product characteristics to all projects on or proposed to be on the SHS regardless of implementing agency, sponsor or funding source. Project Development Team Members During the project initiation and project approval phases, PDT members consist of nine core functional areas representatives from project management, design, structure design, environmental, right of way, traffic operations, transportation planning, construction, and maintenance. Furthermore, during the final design phase the PDT increases by two core functional areas to include representatives from office engineer and structure construction. Each of these functions owns one to three performance characteristics to evaluate, based on the interests, expertise and accountability of the functional area. The performance characteristics and responsible functional areas are listed in the figure below. Performance Characteristic Protective Features x x x Purpose & Need x x x Cost Management x Schedule Management x Design Standards Compliance x x x Environmental Commitments, Minimization & Compliance x R/W Minimization & Compliance x Construction Contract Standards Compliance x x Constructible x x Designed to Operate as Planned x x Maintainable x Optimization x x x Project Management Design Structure Design Environmental Right of Way Office Engineer Construction Structure Construction Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Maintenance Page 5

Although there may be additional PDT members, this handbook was based on the core functional areas described above. The functional area manager should select the most appropriate representative to participate on PDT teams. This representative should be knowledgeable of the project development process, and have technical expertise in the function s manuals, policies, standards, laws, and regulations. Acknowledging that some representatives have limited technical knowledge of some aspects within their functional areas, these representatives should consult technical advisors within their functional areas when needed. Product Evaluation The PDT members should assess the emerging design product using their function s evaluation criteria. One or more functional areas are accountable for each performance characteristic. Each of the eleven functional areas has interests, expertise, and accountability regarding different performance characteristics. When a functional area representative applies an evaluation to a performance characteristic, it becomes a project performance measure. When a project s performance measures are displayed all at once, the display is called a project dashboard. The figure below shows an example project dashboard with 23 performance measures. This type of dashboard should be quickly created and displayed during each PDT meeting. In this example, the team should use the dashboard to prioritize issues, beginning with red (1), which indicates needs significant attention. In the example below, the PDT should develop a plan to involve the necessary PDT members and technical advisors to address Constructible-Construction and Protective Features- Maintenance before the next PDT meeting. Page 6

Project Dashboard (with sample evaluations) Functional Area Performance Characteristic Evaluation Design Purpose & Need 4 Design Standards Compliance 2 Optimization 3 Project Cost Management 4 Management Schedule Management 3 Optimization 3 Structure Design Standards Compliance 2 Design 1 Optimization 3 Right of Way R/W Minimization & Compliance 3 Environmental Purpose & Need 4 Environmental Commitments, Minimization & Compliance 3 Office Construction Contract Standards Compliance 2 Engineer 2 Construction Protective Features 3 Constructible 1 Structure Construction 1,2 Construction Contract Standards Compliance 2 3 Constructible 2 Traffic Protective Features 3 Operations Design Standards Compliance 3 Designed to Operate as Planned 3 Maintenance Protective Features 1 Maintainable 5 Planning Purpose & Need 3 Designed to Operate as Planned 3 NOTE: 1 Recommended for projects with structure(s) 2 Recommended during the final design phase (a.k.a. PS&E phase). Page 7

Project Development Team Meeting Project Managers are to facilitate the PDT issue prioritization as follows: 1. Project Status Page 8 The project engineer, or a representative from the design unit, will provide an overview of the project status and issues in order for the PDT to have sufficient information to provide assessments consistent with the evaluation criteria. Below are possible ways to provide this information: a. A design product, Gantt chart, aerial photo etc. b. The last approved document and intermediate outline or draft document c. Recent project review comments (see below) d. The resolution or status of prior PDT meeting issues 2. Evaluation Each functional area representative individually evaluates the project relative to his or her performance characteristic(s) utilizing the evaluation criteria to assess information and/or products provided. (Refer to the respective evaluation criteria in this handbook.). 3. Display Evaluations (see example above) The PM obtains the evaluation number/color from each functional area representative and displays the resulting project dashboard to the team. 4. Discuss high risk performance measures Performance measures that received an evaluation of Needs Significant or Needs are sources of risk for a project. Beginning with the Needs significant attention measures, the Project Manager facilitates a discussion with the representative who provided the risk assessment(s). As time permits, this step is repeated until all the high risk performance measures have been discussed with the PDT. 5. Prioritize The PDT determines priorities and selects the most significant issues that will require an action plan prior to the next PDT meeting, if any. 6. Next Steps The PDT decides next steps and which technical advisors are necessary to solve each prioritized issue. 7. Risk Registry

The PDT determines which unresolved issues should be incorporated into the risk register in accordance to the Project Risk Management Handbook. 8. Record The PM records the responses of steps 2 thru 7 in the meeting notes. Risk Management at Project PS&E, (Milestone 380) Prior to Milestone 380, Project PS&E, any measures listed as needs significant attention must have completed a thorough collaboration with the appropriate HQ functional unit and then be added to the Risk Register per PD-09, Project Risk Management. If any of the following performance measures are listed as needs significant attention the Legal Division should be consulted in order to develop a risk strategy for the project records. The conversation with the Legal Division is protected by attorney/client privileges and the resulting strategy will assure that risks are fully addressed. Need and Purpose - Design Protective Features - Traffic Operations Protective Features - Maintenance Protective Features - Construction Design Standards Compliance - Traffic Operations Design Standards Compliance - Design Design Standards Compliance - Structure Design Construction Contract Standards Compliance - Construction Designed to Operate as Planned- Traffic Operations Maintainability - Maintenance Optimization - Design Optimization - Structure Design Applicability during Project Reviews The results of district circulation, safety reviews, constructability reviews, and any other technical reviews need to be studied and understood by the appropriate PDT members prior to the PDT meeting, so that these findings can be incorporated into the comprehensive project performance assessment by the PDT. For example, once a safety review has been performed, the project engineer should distribute the results to the PDT members who evaluate Protective Features - the PDT members representing Construction, Page 9

Traffic Operations, and Maintenance. At the next PDT meeting, the safety review results should be considered when determining the evaluations for Protective Features. Similarly, once a constructability review has been performed, the project engineer should distribute these results to Construction, Structures Construction, and Office Engineer PDT members for their consideration when evaluating Constructible and Construction Contract Standards Compliance. Evaluations Guidance Each performance measure is made up of several aspects. Note that there are evaluation criteria for each aspect. Each PDT member should use his/her professional judgment to decide which aspect(s) should be the basis of the evaluation. This assessment should take into consideration the project s schedule, cost, project phase, or other factors. Coming up with a numerical evaluation for a performance characteristic involves: 1. Familiarizing himself/herself with each of the respective functional area s performance characteristics, aspects, and criteria, 2. Reviewing the current status of the project, or, if available, the draft design product, 3. Contrasting the proposed design solutions with applicable standards, policies and practices, 4. Determining the impact of the issues on the performance characteristic (outcome), and 5. Assigning a numerical evaluation consistent with the evaluation criteria The numerical evaluation is dependent on the PDT member professional judgment. For example, suppose the standard calls for a 10-foot shoulder, but the plan proposes a 9-foot shoulder. Professional judgment is needed to determine if the Design Standards Compliance measure is deemed needs attention" or "needs significant attention. If the design product is a 30% PS&E, this issue might need attention, but at 95% the issue might need significant attention. Another example: if the 9-foot shoulder is on an off ramp, it may need attention, but if it is on a freeway mainline it may need significant attention. Remember, the purpose of the evaluation criteria is to help the PDT prioritize issues, and to create a greater degree of consistency statewide. In order to assist in keeping the evaluation criteria as objective as possible, the Design Product Evaluation Criteria Handbook has indexed the evaluation criteria to policies, manuals, regulations, or practices. The more the evaluations are based on Department policies, standards and practices, the more useful and credible this prioritization process will be. Page 10

Design Product Evaluation Template Project No: PDT Meeting Date: Functional Area Performance Characteristic Evaluation Design Project Management Structure Design Purpose & Need Design Standards Compliance Optimization Cost Management Schedule Management Optimization Design Standards Compliance Optimization Right of Way R/W Minimization & Compliance Environmental Purpose & Need Environmental Commitments, Minimization & Compliance Office Construction Contract Standards Compliance Engineer Construction Protective Features Structure Construction Traffic Operations Constructible Construction Contract Standards Compliance Constructible Protective Features Design Standards Compliance Designed to Operate as Planned Maintenance Protective Features Planning Maintainable Purpose & Need Designed to Operate as Planned Page 11

Evaluation Criteria Overall Criteria 5 State of the Art 4 Good 3 Acceptable 2 Needs 1 Needs Significant Complete No changes are necessary Project consistent with master plan and meets future needs Stakeholder expectations exceeded, without controversy Work plan is excellent in all aspects Outstanding clarity of communication Complete, but not outstanding Standards, policies and practices are reasonably well met Presentation and communication clear Comprehensive risk response plan Complete, but minor changes may be called for No mandatory changes required Stakeholder needs are met Compliance with minimum standards Enough information to justify the project moving forward Risk response plan is included Not complete, but should not stop the project Needs justifiable reason to move forward Does not meet minimum requirements or standards, and documentation has not been provided Incomplete risk response plan Not complete, contains major omissions Does not meet the transportation need Fatally flawed in terms of funding, resources, scope, or schedule Does not meet mandatory requirements or standards (all areas) and contains no associated exceptions Totally missing customers expectations Ignores the needs of stakeholder(s) or key functional area(s) No risk response plan Page 12

Design Purpose and Need 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Need (symptoms) and deficiency (what is broken) clearly and succinctly defined. Clearly and succinctly demonstrates a transportation need and deficiency. Clearly stated deficiency is the cause of the transportation problem. Demonstrates a need and related deficiencies - minor changes/clarification can be made. Demonstrates need and deficiencies stated should address problem, maybe some ambiguity or missing minor information. Not well demonstrated, some ambiguous, vague, or incomplete. Need not demonstrated or incomplete. Proposed stated deficiency does not address the need, or existing deficiency not stated. Purpose statement identifies deficiency and defines intended outcome the project will address. A clearly defined transportation deficiency the project intends to address and discusses those that will not be addressed Defines intended outcome, promotes a suitable range of alternatives, and relates to need statement. Discusses transportation deficiencies the project intends to address, but need minor clarification. May not address all deficiencies not to be addressed. Intended outcome is not as specific or comprehensive as it could be, minor clarification or detail may be needed. Defines transportation deficiencies the project intends to address, but need some minor clarification. May not discuss deficiencies not to be addressed. Intended outcome needs some clarification, a little vague or limiting. Purpose does not adequately address transportation deficiencies and is too vague and limiting. Purpose not stated nor has no relation to need statement. Have no idea neither what deficiency the project intends to fix, nor what the intended outcome is--too vague allows too broad of a range of alternatives, or so narrow that it precludes study of reasonable alternatives. Purpose statement states the proposed alternative. Alternatives or proposed design meet the expectations stated in the Need and Purpose? Expectation exceeded, scope exactly met, and limits of work met, no scope creep. Good variety of alternatives - including minimum standard. Expectation met, scope met with very little scope creep. A variety of alternatives - including minimum standard. Expectation, scope, and limits of work met or very close, may have some scope creep. Several alternatives, adequate variety, but no obvious alternative missing- including minimum standard. Expectations not completely met, scope and limits of work missing elements of purpose statement, or exceeded limits, too much creep, original scope lost. Little variety of alternatives, obvious alternatives missing, or is missing minimum standard. Expectations not met, scope and limits of work does not conform to need, too much creep from original scope lost or too much missing. No variety of alternatives, single alternative with other obvious missing - missing minimum standard. Supporting Evidence Evidence clearly demonstrates and identifies transportation deficiency. Demonstrates transportation deficiency - minor changes/clarification are needed, may need more information but no additional studies needed. Demonstrates transportation deficiency - minor changes/clarification can be made, may need more information but no additional studies needed Does not have strong support for need or studies are out of date or incomplete. Does not support need, inadequate support, or evidence not provided/ incomplete. Page 13

Design Designs Standards Compliance Highway Design Manual (HDM) & Design Informational Bulletin (DIB) - PR & 95% Highway Design Manual (HDM) & DIB - PID, DPR, 30%, 60% 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Most minimum standards exceeded and few design exceptions (not because of constraints but to improve the design). Most minimum standards exceeded and few design exceptions (not because of constraints but to improve the design). Some minimum standards exceeded or met, and approved design exceptions. Some minimum standards exceeded or met, and approved design exceptions. DIB-82 Most minimum standards exceeded All minimum standards met or exceeded. AASHTO/Local Standard - Local facilities All local roads exceeded CT or AASHTO standards. All design guidance and standards met and some exceeded. All design standards minimums met or design exceptions approved. All design standards minimums met or design exceptions approved. All minimum standards met or approved design exception. Most design guidance and standards met or exceeded, and documented concurrence for variations. Non-standard features no approved design exceptions Non-standard features no approved design exceptions. May require minor re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no approved design exceptions. Requires minor re-design to get design exception approved. Design guidance and standards not fully met no documented concurrence for variations. Non-standard features no approved exception, Issues with approval. Requires re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no approved exception; No conversations with Design Coordinator or Reviewer; Critical issues with approval; Requires major re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no approved exception. Requires major re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no documented concurrence for variations, Issues with approval. Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM) - PID/PR/PSE Meets all PDPM requirements with all issues clearly defined and fully discussed, and all alternatives sufficiently explored Meets all PDPM requirements with all issues defined and discussed, and variety of alternatives explored. Meets PDPM requirements with issues defined and may not be fully discussed, and few alternatives explored. Does not meet PDPM requirements with issues not clearly defined or discussed, and only single alternatives explored, no other mentioned. Does not meet PDPM requirements with issues not defined or discussed, and only single alternatives explored no other mentioned. PDPM - New/Modified Public Road Connection. Existing interchanges and/or local roads to be improved along with new connection to satisfactorily accommodate traffic demand. New public road connections and work on existing local roads will have positive effects on facility operation. Demonstrated that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to satisfactorily accommodate traffic demand. New public road connections will have no detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation. Demonstrated that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to satisfactorily accommodate traffic demand. New public road connections will affect but have no detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation. Incomplete analysis or questionable that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to accommodate traffic demand New public road connections will have detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation or incomplete analysis. No demonstration that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to accommodate traffic demand New public road connections will have detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation or no analysis. Page 14

Design Optimization HDM 81Design Philosophy 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Project provides the greatest public good over the long term for the total cost. Excellent cost/results Good cost/benefit Project provides public good over the Design Life for the Total cost. Acceptable cost/benefit Marginal cost/benefit The project chose the lowest cost alternative for a very narrowly focused purpose or short term benefits, leaving a system that down the road may be a costly to maintenance and operations with little or no long term benefit. Poor cost/benefit Reasonably accommodates all users All uses have clearly been taken care of and may even have separate facilities (Pedestrian Over Crossing or truck bypass), including during construction All users should be able to safely navigate through project limits, including during construction. Adequate accommodations for all uses all have short comings to accommodate other users. Reasonable safety for all, including during construction Access cutoff/blocked for one or more users, as designed and/or during construction One or more users clearly excluded by design, including during construction. Accommodate future of facility (beyond design life) Project facilitates future expansion to ultimate facility configuration and area build out. (Beyond design year) All new large capital outlay structures will work with future expansion Minor element will need to be rebuilt with future expansion. Although does not preserver ultimate foot print, does not encourage growth that would prohibit ultimate expansion. To accommodate future/ultimate expansion will require complete or major reconstruction. Project prohibits future growth, by putting in very expensive structures that will have to be completely rebuilt, or will encourage local growth which would prohibit future expansion. Compatibility/ Consistency with adjacent facility Compatible with or facilitates adjacent existing features, or is part of evolution of a facility for one type to another (conventional to freeway/expressway) Project is compatible with adjacent project/existing features, yet accommodates future needs. Project works with adjacent project/existing features Issues/conflicts with adjacent project/ existing features No compatibility with adjacent project/ existing features Driver Expectation/ standard practice No Driver confusion, Intuitive to travel Meets driver expectation Meets driver expectation, some signing may be needed to clarify. Driver indecision signing may not be enough to clarify. Driver confusion route/ alignment too complicated signing may not help. Page 15

Project Management Cost Management (Page 1 of 4) 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Support Cost Estimate Support Cost Estimate from completed and approved Workplan -- Resourced Loaded Schedule -- using WBS Level 5 (or lower Level 6, Level 7, etc.) Activities and Milestones with Logic. Support Cost Estimate used for planning, programming, or budgeting support and is consistent with District Director Approved Project Study Report (PSR), Project Report (PR), Supplemental Project Report (PR) and/or Cooperative Agreement (Co-op). Support Cost Estimate partially complete or not up to date, i.e. missing activities, milestones, resources, etc. May require updated workplan, PSR, PSSR, PR, supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Support Cost Estimate not available. May require workplan, PSR, PR, supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Support Cost Component Estimate Project Support Cost Estimate summarized into the four support components -- SB-45 Components -- PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support -- according to the approved Workplan (Resourced Loaded Schedule). Support Estimate includes escalation rate according to the year the work is estimated. Support estimate includes the appropriate ICRP (Indirect Cost Rate %) for Caltrans Support versus Reimbursed Work. Project Support Cost Component used to identify support budget in PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Support Cost Estimate summarized by components partially complete, i.e. updated schedule, additional resources, escalation factor, correct ICRP, etc or not included in PSR, PR, supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. May require updated workplan, escalation calculation, support component calculation, PSR, PR, or Supplemental PR. Support Cost Estimate summarized by components not available. May require workplan, PSR, PR, or Supplemental PR. IQA Support Cost Estimate (For Projects performed by Local Agency -- Not Applicable if work is performed by Caltrans) IQA Support Estimate from Completed Workplan -- Resource Loaded Schedule -- using WBS Level 6 Activities, Milestones with logic, and consistent with District Director Approved PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Cooperative Agreement. IQA Support Estimate partially complete. May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. IQA support estimate and/or Cooperative Agreement not available. May require IQA workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Page 16

Project Management Cost Management (Page 2 of 4) Programmed Support Cost (Or Approved Support Budget if project is not programmed in STIP or SHOPP, i.e. Reimbursed Work) Forecast Support Cost Estimate at Completion Support Cost Performance Index (CPI) -- Earned Value (If available) 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 90% to 110 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 85% to 115 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Support Estimate Components used to program PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and/or Construction Support in approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document (RTP, FTIP, etc.). Include appropriate escalation rate and ICRP rate. Includes any approved Cooperative Agreement with local agencies for other funding. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 80% to 120 % of the approved Programmed Amount (i.e. PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support). May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change. Support Cost Estimate Components not consistent with Program Document or other financial planning document. May require updated workplan, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 70% to 130% of the Programmed Amount (i.e. PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support). May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change. 0.75 < CPI < 1.25 CPI < 0.75 or CPI > 1.25 May need to adjust project budget and/or program budget change. Support Estimate Components not available to validate support budget in program document. May require workplan, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate less than 70% or greater than 130% of the Programmed Amount. (i.e. PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support). May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change. Construction Capital Cost Estimate Construction Capital Cost Estimate prepared according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. 6 page estimate, etc., and is consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), and/or Cooperative Agreement. Construction Capital Cost Estimate needs to be updated according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. 6 page estimate, etc., and/or is not consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s). May require an updated Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Construction Capital Cost Estimate not available or not based upon District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation requirements, and/or not based upon approved Department cost estimating methodology -- i.e. 6 page estimate, etc. May require a Construction Capital Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Page 17

Project Management Cost Management (Page 3 of 4) 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Right of Way Capital Estimate Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate prepared according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. R/W Data Sheet, Environmental Mitigation, Utility Relocation, Railroad, etc., and is consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), and/or Cooperative Agreement. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate needs to be updated according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. R/W Data Sheet, Environmental Mitigation, Utility Relocation, Railroad, etc., and/or is not consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s). May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate not based upon District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Cooperative Agreement, and/or not based upon the approved Department cost estimating methodology -- i.e. R/W Data Sheet, etc. May require R/W Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Environmental Capital Estimate Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate prepared according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. PEAR, MCCE, etc., and is consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), and/or Cooperative Agreement.. Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate needs to be updated according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. PEAR, MCCE, etc., and/or is not consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s). May require an updated Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate not based upon District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Environmental Document using the approved Department cost estimating methodology -- PEAR, MCCE, etc. May require a PEAR/MCCE Capital Estimate, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Programmed Construction Capital Construction Capital Cost Estimate from approved PSR, PSSR, PR, or Supplemental PR used to program Construction Capital in approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. Construction Capital Cost Estimate not consistent with Approved Program Document. May require an updated Capital Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Construction Capital Cost Estimate not available to verify Approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. May require a Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Page 18

Project Management Cost Management Page 4 of 4) Programmed Right of Way Capital 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate from approved PSR/PSSR/PR used to program Construction Capital in approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate not consistent with Approved Program Document. May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Co-op, and/or program change. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate not available to verify Approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. May require a Right of Way Capital Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Co-op, and/or program change. Construction Capital Forecast Cost Estimate at Completion Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 90% to 110 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 85% to 115 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 80% to 120 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 70% to 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate less than 70% or greater than 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Right of Way Capital Forecast Cost Estimate at Completion Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 90% to 110 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 85% to 115 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 80% to 120 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 70% to 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate less than 70% or greater than 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Page 19

Project Management Schedule Management Workplan Development (Planning) 5 4 3 4 5 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant All WBS Level 5 (or lower Level 6, Level 7, etc.) Activities and Milestones with logic identified in workplan schedule and consistent with District Director Approved PSR and/or Project Report. Workplan schedule not consistent in Approved PSR/PR/Environmental Document and may require the schedule to be updated. No Workplan schedule developed or included in Approved PSR/PR. Programmed Schedule Workplan delivery schedule for PA&ED, PS&E, Right of Way, and Construction used to identify delivery schedule and consistent with approved programming document. Forecast Schedule at Completion and Progress Forecast Schedule at Completion for WBS Activities and Milestone progress on schedule according to the approved program document schedule. Schedule activities, milestones, and progress (percent complete) up to date (no past due dates or missing progress). Delivery Milestones and updated progress up to date in Delivery Plan and Contract for Delivery. Schedule consistent with District Director Approved PSR/PSSR/Project Report/Environmental Document, or Supplemental Project Report and Revalidated Environmental Document. Workplan delivery schedule for PA&ED, PS&E, Right of Way, and Construction not consistent with program delivery schedule in an approved programming document which may require program schedule change. Forecast Schedule at Completion and WBS Activity and Milestone Progress not up to date and may require program schedule change. Workplan Development Schedule not used to schedule program delivery in an approved programming document. Forecast Schedule at Completion or WBS Activity and Milestones not Progressed and/or does not match approved program document. Schedule Performance Index (SPI) -- Earned Value (Not Applicable if Earned Value Calculation not available) SPI = 1.0 SPI > 1.0 SPI < 1.0 Page 20

Project Management Optimization 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Approved Scope of Work Project Scope of Work indentified in a District Director approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR and/or Environmental Document. Project scope properly identified in PMCS, XPM, and Programming Document and includes project description, type of work, project location, approved budget, COS and/or reimbursed workload, implementing agency responsibilities, program code(s), fund type, and any type of cooperative agreement(s). Project Scope of Work not consistent with District Director approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Environmental Document and may require supplemental scoping document and environmental revalidation. Project scope may need to be updated in PMCS, XPM, Cooperative Agreement, and/or Programming Document. Project scope not available and/or alternatives removed or not included in a District Director approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR and/or Environmental Document. Project scope not available in PMCS, XPM, or programming or other financial planning document. May require workplan, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. May need to be added to PMCS, XPM, and/or program change. Scope of work consistent between PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, or Environmental Document including documentation for alternatives, or locations, identified but no longer considered. Scope of work not consistent between PSR, PSSR, and Project Report or Environmental Document for the alternative reviewed but no longer considered. May need Supplemental PR and environmental revalidation regarding alternatives/locations no longer considered. May require program change. Cooperative Agreements (Not applicable if there is no Co-op) Program Scope Cooperative Agreement executed in accordance to the District Director approved PSR, PSSR, PR, and/or Supplemental PR. Cooperative Agreement consistent with approved Program Document or other financial planning document. Project Scope of Work approved by District Director in a PSR, PSSR, PR and used to program project in a program document according to the scope, cost, and schedule. Project Scope of Work and Description consistent with approved Program Document, FTIP, Regional Transportation Plan, etc. Cooperative Agreement may be needed for exchange of services of funding on a project. May require and amended Cooperative Agreement, updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or program. Project Scope of Work may need to be updated according to the District Director approved PSR, PSSR, PR, and Environmental Document and may require a supplemental document, environmental revalidation, and program document change. Cooperative Agreement not available. May require cooperative agreement, workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or program change. Project Scope of Work not covered by District Director approved PSR, PR, and/or Environmental Document. Project Scope of Work not covered in approved programming document, FTIP, Regional Transportation Plan, etc. Page 21

Structure Design Design Standards Compliance (1 of 2) Reports/Approvals/ Recommendations Retrofit Evaluation Report (widening) Foundation Reports Hydraulic Reports Signatures 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Reports address all aspects of the projects and those aspects are addressed within the project plans. All required signatures are shown and reports are complete. Reports address all aspects of the projects and are reflected on the project plans. All required signatures are shown and reports are complete. Reports suggestions are not reflected on contract plans concisely. All signatures and documents and report of interests appear to exist with no apparent problems or insufficiencies. Reports are insufficient. Required signatures are shown. Important/Critical Documents or Reports are either missing or insufficient. Required signatures missing Documents/Specifications/ Standards AASHTO LRFD and CA Amendments CA Seismic Design Criteria Bridge Memo To Designers All design standards documents are used, current and optimized. All standards are balanced and latest design guidelines are incorporated. All design standards documents used are current. All standards are balanced and latest design guidelines are incorporated. Most of design standards documents used are current and latest design guidelines are incorporated. The correct Standards/Specifications are not used for the Design. Incorrect references to Standards/details are made thru the project plans. The correct Specifications are not used for the Design and there is no apparent reason or explanation for the use of Non-Standard Specifications. Caltrans/ Structures policies or methods are clearly not followed. Structural System Structure Type Foundation Type Structural element capacity (Shear, Moment, etc.) Skew Prestressing/Post-tensioning Camber Hinges Profile Grade, Super Elevations, Contours Retrofit Widening Seismic Specific Considerations( Relative Column size, seat widths, ductile members) Structural System chosen appears to be novel and better than might ordinarily be chosen for such a project. Structure type and detailing shown appears to demonstrate excellent engineering judgment. Structural System chosen is the best choice for such a project. No apparent structural inadequacies or bad choices made. Everything appears to be in order and complete. Structure Type is questionable and details are not complete. Structure Type chosen is inappropriate for its intended use and doesn t appear to meet the expectation of the Type Selection process. Structural members do not appear to be adequate for their intended purposes. Details don t meet the SDC criteria and Guidelines. Page 22

Structure Design Design Standards Compliance (2 of 2) Detailing Standards Sheet Layout and order Reinforcement Details Dimension Style & Consistency Seismic Specific Elements (Ultimate and Service splice, Plastic Hinge location) Existing structures (Widening, etc.) Pay Limits Identified Staging Sequences 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Plans are as simple as possible to read, follow and understand. They meet or exceed Structural Standards. Details are laid out in a systematic and logical way. Clarity of complex details is exceptional and no typographical errors found. Plans meet Structural Standards and are clear, concise and easy to follow. No typographical errors found. All details are adequately shown and look clear and sufficient. Layout of details is acceptable even if not as clean as possible. Typographical errors are at a minimum. Details are not clear and sufficient to show the work items. There are typographical errors but can be fixed. Critical details are missing or just plain wrong or ambiguous. Typographical errors are numerous. Layout of details might be correct, however they are very confusing. Likely due to a lack of time spent by designers on assessing the overall plan quality. Clearances Horizontal Vertical Falsework Openings Railroad and Railroad Right of Way Any/All clearances of importance are shown and appear to be correct. Falsework notes are complete. Complies with Railroad requirements. All required clearances are called out correctly. Falsework notes are complete. Plans Comply with Railroad requirements. All critical/required clearances are called out and appear to be correct. Plans Comply with Railroad requirements. All critical/required clearances are called out but needs to be adjusted. Falsework notes are not complete. Railroad guidelines are not fully followed. Clearances appear to be incorrect or insufficient and/or Critical clearances are not shown. Railroad guidelines are not followed. Page 23

Structure Design Optimization Consistency w/specs Order of work Work items 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Contract plans are consistent with Special Provisions. All work items are clearly described in Special Provisions and Method of payment is clear and unit(s) matches contract Plans. Contract plans are consistent with Special Provisions. All work items are clearly described in Special Provisions and units match with contract Plans. There is minor inconsistency between Plans and Special Provisions but are fixable. All structure work items are described in Special Provisions and units match with contract Plans. There is minor inconsistency between Plans and Special Provisions but are fixable. Plans are inconsistent with Special Provisions. Pay items do not match with method of payment described in Special Provisions. Consistency w/road Plans Alignments and layout lines Profile Grade and Super elevation Roadway widths BB/EB Location Stage Construction Surcharge End of wingwall/retaining walls Utilities Drainage Lighting Signs Clarity of details between Structure Plans and Roadway plans are exceptional and all data appears to be correct. No questions are anticipated, i.e. Contractor can be expected to perform adequately with very little guidance from State personnel, all due to this Quality set of this product. All items covered in Structure Plans are consistent with Roadway Plans. Items covered in Structure Plans are consistent with Roadway Plans. Minor modifications can be addressed by design staff. Structure plans and Roadway plans are inconsistent. May be resolved by field personal at low to moderate cost. Structure Plans and Roadway plans are inconsistent. Structure profile and X slopes do not match with roadway grades or adjacent infrastructures requiring redesign and major change. Risk Identified Existing Footing Existing Utility Hazardous materials Utilities (new/existing) are shown on both structure plans and roadway plans. No apparent utility conflicts shown on plans without mitigation. Contaminated materials are mitigated appropriately. Utilities (new/existing) are shown on both structure plans and roadway plans. Contaminated materials are mitigated appropriately. Conflicts appear minor enough to be addressed by field personal. There is a conflict between utilities and structures but can be resolved before construction starts. Contaminated material are not discussed in the report nor shown on the plans. Not all the utilities are shown on Foundation plans. Potholes are not initiated. Issues need to be resolved in construction. Page 24

Right of Way Right of Way Minimization & Compliance 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant R/W Defined Scope (sufficient lead time, scope reflected in the data sheet) Layout Sheets/Plan Sheets/Mapping (applicable in PS&E) Mitigation All R/W impacts are clearly identified for all R/W functions (utilities, railroads, environmental impacts, etc,) Perfectly designed scope and schedule with no changes/revisions/additions, etc. Risks constraints and assumptions are well considered. Layout sheets/plan Sheets/Maps (all types) exceed all requirements and have numerous gold-plating attributes. Never any changes. All mitigation requirements and impacts have been identified including cost estimates. Requirements can be completed early. Never any changes. Utilities Existing utilities have been 100% verified and identified. Mapping includes drainage plans, landscaping plans, construction staging, detours, and additional mapping such as aerials etc. No changes will occur. Scope well detailed with all R/W involvement clearly defined. All products completed in accordance with existing requirements. Risks constraints and assumptions are considered. Layout sheets/plan sheets/maps (all types) meet all requirements and have some gold-plating (aerials, 3- dimensional). Minor changes only. All mitigation requirements and impacts have been identified including cost estimates. No issues with completing requirements timely. Utility conflict maps reflect accurate information from field reviews, permit searches, as-built searches, potholing information and verifications from owners. Also existing and proposed right of way lines are shown. Drainage maps are included. Scope defined well enough to establish known impacts to R/W with +a 5%. Enough information to complete R/W Data Sheet. Risks constraints and assumptions are considered. Layout sheets/plan sheets/maps (all types) adequate enough to complete R/W Data Sheet, send utility conflict maps to owners, send maps to Railroad, begin appraising. Very minimal changes. All mitigation requirements and impacts have been identified including cost estimates. Minimal revisions may occur. Utility conflict maps reflect accurate information from field reviews, permit searches, as-built searches, potholing information and verifications from owners. Also existing and proposed right of way lines are shown. Some information on Scope. But will likely have significant changes. Still not enough information to complete R/W Data Sheet or assess R/W impacts. Risks and constraints are minimally considered. Layout sheets/plan sheets/maps exist (all types) but insufficient to complete R/W Data Sheet. Maps lack one or more mandatory requirements MCCE Form is not complete resulting in cost estimates not being completed or accurate. Mitigation impacts not know which could result in R/W certification delay. Utility conflict maps minimally reflect field review but does not include, permit search, as-built search or verifications from owners. Potholing to verify or positively identify underground utilities has not been completed. Scope undefined Perhaps nothing more than one sentence description. No mapping has been completed. Not enough information to complete R/W Data Sheet or assess R/W impacts. Risks and constraints are not considered. Insufficient Layout sheets/plan sheets/maps or napkin mapping. No information of environmental requirements (purchasing fee vs. land bank). Maps not adequate or complete to send out verification maps or conflict maps to owners. Railroads Railroad impacts known, discussed in detail, package for railroad complete for submittal. No changes to plans that would affect railroads. Railroad impacts known, discussed in detail and package for railroad completed for submittal. Railroad discussion detailed and impacts known and discussed in detail, including easement, fee, C&M Agreement, etc. Railroad discussion brief with no details of impact. No mention of railroad involvement in narrative or on mapping. Page 25

Environmental Purpose and Need Need of Project is Supported by discussion and accompanying documentation Independent Utility Logical Termini Purpose and Need Statement 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Need of project is well supported by documentation. Connection between supporting documentation and need is clear. Standards are exceeded by the project. Any requirements of legislative mandates are exceeded. Project is justified. Examples: Concept LOS is met, delay times are substantially reduced or eliminated, transportation demand objective is completely met, safety concerns are completely achieved, roadway deficiencies are completely addressed, Proposed improvements exceed social demands and economical development as identified in the purpose and need. Project is stand alone. Project solves problem completely without dependency on any other Project. The limits of work are clearly labeled and identified. Limits of work are completely logical and rational. Limits of work provide maximum utility. Logical termini are consistent with environmental study. Completely consistent with Caltrans policy and DD-83. Project is consistent with purpose. Purpose & Need statement has been clearly presented. No questions remain. Need of project is well supported by documentation. Connection between supporting documentation and need is clear. Standards are met and some are exceeded by the project. Any requirements of legislative mandates are met and some are exceeded. Project is justified. Project is stand alone. Project has logical termini. Purpose & Need statement is clear. Project is consistent with purpose. Need of project is well supported by documentation. Connection between supporting documentation and need could be clearer. Standards are met by the project. Any requirements of legislative mandates are met. Project is justified. Project is stand alone. Questions raised by public or other entities but all questions regarding utility have been adequately addressed. Project has logical termini. Questions raised by public or other entities but all questions regarding logical termini have been adequately addressed. Purpose & Need statement is adequate but needs some clarification. Project appears to be consistent with purpose statement. Need of project is supported by documentation. Project justification could be improved. Connection between supporting documentation and need could be clearer. Minimum standards are met by the project. Any requirements of legislative mandates are met. Unclear if Project has independent utility. Unclear if Project has logical termini. Purpose & Need document requires some clarification and the Project may not meet the purpose Any of the following apply: Need of project is not supported by documentation. Project justification needs improvement. Connection between supporting documentation and need is unclear. Minimum standards are not met by the project. Any requirements of legislative mandates are not met. Environmental Document at risk due to dependencies of other Projects. Logical termini have not been identified, are not logical, or rational. Logical termini are not at all consistent with environmental study. Purpose & Need statement is not consistent with other documents and Project does not meet the purpose. Page 26

Environmental Environmental Commitments, Minimization, & Compliance Environmental Impacts: Level of Impact (Based on Review both Design Product and Environmental Document) Environmental Impacts: Displayed in Design Document Scope Consistency Air Quality Conformity Purpose & Need Consistency 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Expected environmental impacts are analyzed. All significant impacts have been avoided by the Project. No compensatory mitigation is required. Substantial environmental impacts and related avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures are summarized. Environmental related permits, opinions, and agreements needed prior to Project construction are also summarized. Summary is prominent, clear and succinct to ensure that decision makers are aware of environmental consequences of the action. Funds are identified for mitigation, fees, permits and long-term maintenance costs. Verbatim consistency between Design Product and Environmental Product scope. Although not verbatim, the RTP/RTIP scope is consistent with Design/Environmental Products. Air quality conformity is applicable to the project area. The documentation provided includes a notation that the project area is subject to air quality conformity requirements and as applicable provides documentation that this requirement has been met. The scope and schedule for the Project in the design, environmental, and planning (e.g. RTP) documents agree. Verbatim consistency between Design Product and Environmental Product purpose and need. Expected environmental impacts are analyzed. All significant impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels. Feasible avoidance measures are included in the Project. Strong justification is provided for the exclusion of unfeasible avoidance measures. Substantial environmental impacts and related avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures are summarized. Environmental related permits, opinions, and agreements needed prior to Project construction are also summarized. Summary is fairly prominent, clear and succinct to ensure that decision makers are aware of environmental consequences of the action. Funds are identified for mitigation, fees, permits and long-term maintenance costs. Minor rewording but otherwise Design Product and Environmental Product scopes are consistent. Although not verbatim, the RTP/RTIP scope is consistent with Design/Environmental Products. Air quality conformity does not apply to the project. The design and environmental products adequately document that conformity does not apply. Minor rewording but otherwise Design Product and Environmental Product purpose and need are consistent. Expected environmental impacts are analyzed. All significant impacts are either mitigated to less than significant levels or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared. Feasible avoidance measures are included in the project. Justification is provided for the exclusion of avoidance measures. Substantial environmental impacts and mitigation are summarized. Environmental related permits, opinions, and agreements needed prior to Project construction are also summarized. Discussion of impacts, mitigation and permits are available but would benefit from greater prominence, clarity and/or brevity. Funds are identified for mitigation, fees, permits and long-term maintenance costs. Extensive rewording between environmental and design product but major elements of the scope are consistent. Although not verbatim, the RTP/RTIP scope is consistent with Design/Environmental Products. Air quality conformity is applicable to the project area but the project is too early in the process to have completed its documentation for conformity requirements. Extensive rewording between environmental and design product but major elements of the purpose and need are consistent. Environmental impacts are analyzed but analysis is not clear and/or thorough. All significant impacts are either mitigated to less than significant levels or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared. Justification for the exclusion of pertinent avoidance measures is not well defined. Environmental document is incorporated by reference. Summary of environmental impacts and mitigation are not included in design document. Required permits are listed or specific reference to environmental document Section that discusses permits is included. Beyond format and presentation, actual elements of Environmental and Design Products have minor inconsistencies in terms of scope. Minor corrections are needed to achieve agreement in the two documents. Although not verbatim, the RTP/RTIP scope is consistent with Design/Environmental Products. Air quality conformity is applicable to the project area. The documentation provided includes a notation that the project area is subject to air quality conformity requirements and as applicable provides documentation that this requirement has been met. The scope and schedule for the Project in the design, environmental, and planning (e.g. RTP) documents do not agree. The PDT is aware of this and is currently seeking amendment to the RTP. Beyond format and presentation, actual elements of Environmental and Design Products have minor inconsistencies in terms of purpose and need. Minor corrections are needed to achieve agreement in the two documents. Expected environmental impacts are not covered by analysis. Mitigation measures would not clearly reduce impacts. Feasible avoidance measures are not incorporated into the Project scope. No reference to environmental document. Missing environmental document. Discussion of impacts, mitigation, and permits is missing. Long term commitments unaddressed. Beyond format and presentation, actual elements of Environmental and Design Products have major inconsistencies in terms of scope. Major corrections are needed to achieve agreement in the two documents. RTP/RTIP scope is inconsistent with Design/Environmental Products. Air quality conformity is applicable to the project area. The documentation provided includes a notation that the project area is subject to air quality conformity requirements and as applicable provides documentation that this requirement has been met. The scope and schedule for the Project in the design, environmental, and planning (e.g. RTP) documents do not agree. The PDT has not sought an amendment to the RTP or revisions to the project to bring it in conformance with the RTP. Beyond format and presentation, actual elements of Environmental and Design Products have major inconsistencies in terms of purpose and need. Major corrections are needed to achieve agreement in the two documents. Page 27

Office Engineer Construction Contract Standards Compliance (Page 1 of 3) Plans Standards Compliant Specifications Standard Compliant 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Every standard has been met. Extra effort was made to present and provide information clearly. Standards have been met with minor deviations but they are not detrimental to processing the product. Standards met overall; changes required but not detrimental to processing the product. Standards not entirely met; there are some changes required that would require additional effort. Plans are not descriptive of the work required due to a lack of conformance to the standards, which would cause major delays and may be detrimental to the project. All NSSPs have been identified 90% of NSSPs have been identified 75% of NSSPs have been identified 55% of NSSPs have been identified NSSPs have not been identified No editing beyond SSP Instructions 90% of NSSPs have District Construction Concurrence. 75% of NSSPs have District Construction Concurrence. 55% of NSSPs have District Construction Concurrence. NSSPs missing District Construction concurrence All exception documentation provided: 90% of SSPs do not have editing beyond SSP Instructions and no edits beyond instructions to technical or 75% of SSPs do not have editing beyond SSP Instructions and no edits beyond instructions to technical or 55% of SSPs do not have editing beyond SSP Instructions and no edits beyond instructions to technical or SSPs edited beyond instructions and revised technical and/or payment clauses payment clauses. payment clauses. payment clauses. PIF's 90% of exception documentation provided: 75% of exception documentation provided: 60% of exception documentation provided: More than 40% of exception documentation missing Supplemental Work Exceptions PIF's PIF's PIF's Less than 75% of the SSPs contain approved styles Etc. Supplemental Work Exceptions Supplemental Work Exceptions Supplemental Work Exceptions Edits not indentified by user initials Only approved styles in SSP package Etc. Etc. Etc. Additions not indicated by blue underline No track changes in SSP package. Only approved styles in SSP package 90% of SSPs contain approved styles in SSP package. Special Section 4's submitted as separate files. No table of contents in SSP package. No information in Header and Footers of SSP Package All edits identified by user's initials. 75% of SSPs contain approved styles in SSP package Deletions not indicated by red Strike through No track changes in SSP package. No track changes in SSP package. All edits identified by user's initials. SSPs sections 8-10 not numbered sequentially Special Section 4's submitted as separate files. Special Section 4's submitted as separate files. Additions in blue underline No Table of contents in SSP package. No Table of contents in SSP package. Deletions in red strike-through No information in Header and Footers of SSP Package No information in Header and Footers of SSP Package SSPs Sections 8-10 numbered sequentially Additions in blue underline All edits identified by user's initials. All edits identified by user's initials. 80% of SSPs included per SSP Index Deletions in red strike-through Additions in blue underline Additions in blue underline All SSPs included per SSP Index Deletions in red strike-through Deletions in red strike-through SSPs Sections 8-10 numbered sequentially SSPs Sections 8-10 numbered sequentially SSPs Sections 8-10 numbered sequentially Section 5 SSPs not numbered 90% of SSPs included & Updated per SSP Index 90% of SSPs included per SSP Index Less than 80% of SSPs included per SSP Index Page 28

Office Engineer Construction Contract Standards Compliance (Page 2 of 3) Contract Consistency 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant All contract items quantities, item descriptions and unit of measure are consistent throughout the plans, specifications and estimate (PSE) Majority of contract quantities, Item descriptions and unit of measure are consistent throughout the PSE. Majority of contract quantities, Item descriptions and unit of measure are consistent throughout the PSE with minor deviations and/or omissions. Major as well as minor PSE contract items quantities, item descriptions and unit of measure are inconsistent and/or omitted to the extent that additional minimal work is required to address. Omissions, errors exist with the majority of the PSE contract quantities, Item descriptions and major effort is required to address RTL Guide Public Contract Code 10120 All bid item quantities can be calculated by bidders from plan details and specifications. All plan work is called out and callout matches item descriptions in BEES. Work Quantity totals on the Summary of Quantity sheets match the BEES quantities unless rounded in accordance with Section 7 of the RTL Guide or are a (F) pay item. There is a measurement and payment clause for each BEES Item in the special provisions or Standard Specifications The majority of bid item quantities can be calculated by bidders from plan details and specifications. The majority of plan work is called out and callout matches item descriptions in BEES. Work Quantity totals on the Summary of Quantity sheets match the BEES quantities unless rounded in accordance with Section 7 of the RTL Guide or are a (F) pay item. There are measurement and payment clauses for the majority of BEES Items in the special provisions or Standard Specifications. The majority of bid item quantities can be calculated by bidders from plan details and specifications with minor deviations and/or omissions. The majority of plan work is called out and callout matches item descriptions in BEES with minor deviations and/or omissions. The majority work quantity totals on the Summary of Quantity sheets match the BEES quantities unless rounded in accordance with Section 7 of the RTL Guide or are a (F) pay item. Major BEES contract items have measurement and payment clauses in the special provisions or Standard Specifications with minor deviations and/or omissions. The majority of bid item quantities cannot be calculated by bidders from plan details and specifications, deviations and/or omissions are to such an extent that additional minimal work is required to address. The majority of plan work is not called out and callout does not match item description in BEES and/or omissions are to such an extent that additional minimal work is required to address. The majority work quantity totals on the Summary of Quantity sheets do not match the BEES quantities and are not rounded in accordance with Section 7 of the RTL Guide or are a (F) pay item. Additional minimal work is required to address. The majority of BEES contract items do not have measurement and payment clauses in the special provisions or Standard Specification to such an extent that additional minimal work is required to address. The majority of bid item quantities cannot be calculated by bidders from plan details and specifications. Deviations and/or omissions are to such an extent that the contract is incomplete and major effort is required to address The majority of plan work is not called out and callout does not match item description in BEES and/or omissions are to such an extent that the contract is incomplete and major effort is required to address The majority work quantity totals on the Summary of Quantity sheets do not match the BEES quantities, to the extent that the contract is incomplete and major effort is required to address. The majority of BEES contract items do not have measurement and payment clauses in the special provisions or Standard Specification to the extent that the contract is incomplete and major effort is required to address Details do not conflict with details shown on other project plan sheets. Special Provisions do not have conflicting specifications within them. The majority of details do not conflict with details shown on other project plan sheets. The majority of the contract special provisions do not have conflicting specifications within them. The majority of details do not conflict with details shown on other project plan sheets however, minor deviations and/or omissions exist. The majority of the contract special provisions do not have conflicting specifications however, minor deviations and/or omissions exist The majority of details conflict with other details had shown on other project plan sheets to the extent that additional minimal work is required to address. The majority of the contract special provisions have conflicting specifications. Deviations and/or omissions exist to the extent that additional minimal work is required to address. The majority of details conflict with details shown on other project plan sheets to the extent that the contract is incomplete and major effort is required to address. The majority of the contract special provisions have conflicting specifications and deviations and/or omissions exist to the extent that the contract is incomplete and major effort is required to address. Page 29

Office Engineer Construction Contract Standards Compliance (Page 3 of 3) Estimate Standards Compliant PLACs (Permits, Licenses, Agreements, and Certificates) compliance System Process Requirements 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant BEES quantities rounded per RTL Guide No Hundredth place significant digits in BEES quantities Units of measure agree with Measurement and Payment clauses in the Specifications Non-Standard Item Codes formatted correctly No one-time Item Codes recycled from past projects. Supplemental Work items from approved list 95% of BEES quantities rounded per RTL Guide No Hundredth place significant digits in BEES quantities 95% of Units of measure agree with Measurement and Payment clauses in the Specifications 90% of Non-Standard Item Codes formatted correctly No one-time Item Codes recycled from past projects. 90% Supplemental Work items from approved list or have specific approvals State Furnished items agree with those shown in SSP S8-M10 Supplemental Work and State Furnished Material Item Codes begin with 066 All available permit requirements incorporated in Specifications 90% of Permits included at SSP submittal to DES-OE 80% of BEES quantities rounded per RTL Guide No Hundredth place significant digits in BEES quantities 85% of Units of measure agree with Measurement and Payment clauses in the Specifications 80% of Non-Standard Item Codes formatted correctly No one-time Item Codes recycled from past projects. 80% Supplemental Work items from approved list or have specific approvals State Furnished items agree with those shown in SSP S8-M10 Supplemental Work and State Furnished Material Item Codes begin with 066 All available permit requirements incorporated in Specifications 80% of Permits included at SSP submittal to DES-OE 55% of BEES quantities rounded per RTL Guide No Hundredth place significant digits in BEES quantities 55% of Units of measure agree with Measurement and Payment clauses in the Specifications 55% of Non-Standard Item Codes formatted correctly No one-time Item Codes recycled from past projects. 55% Supplemental Work items from approved list or have specific approvals State Furnished items agree with those shown in SSP S8-M10 Supplemental Work and State Furnished Material Item Codes begin with 066 All available permit requirements incorporated in Specifications 70% of Permits included at SSP submittal to DES-OE Incorrect rounding of BEES quantities or are a final (F) pay item Hundredth place significant digits in BEES quantities Units of measure do not agree with Measurement and Payment clauses in the Specifications Non-Standard Item Codes formatted incorrectly One-time Item Codes recycled from past projects. Nonstandard Supplemental Work items used without approval State Furnished items agree with those shown in SSP S8-M10 State Furnished items do not agree with those shown in SSP S8-M10 Supplemental Work and State Supplemental Work and State Furnished Material Item Codes begin Furnished Material Item Codes do not with 066 begin with 066 All permit requirements incorporated Permit requirements not incorporated in Specifications in Specifications All Permits included at SSP submittal Less than 70% of Permits included at to DES-OE SSP submittal to DES-OE All Permits listed in SSP S5-280 All Permits listed in SSP S5-280 All Permits listed in SSP S5-280 All Permits listed in SSP S5-280 Not all Permits listed in SSP S5-280 Supplemental Project Information includes all permits Pre-Publication Review completed within 8 hours. No reprographic issues with project Plans Job File submitted within 48 hours of project submittal Project submitted with Funding documentation Job File submitted with card-stock covers, section dividers and two-hole punched Supplemental Project Information includes all available permits and status of pending permits Pre-Publication Review completed within 12 hours. No reprographic issues with project Plans Job File submitted within 72 hours of project submittal Project submitted with Funding documentation Job File submitted with covers, section dividers and two-hole punched Correct District Color cover submitted Correct District Color cover submitted Supplemental Project Information includes 80% of all available permits and status of pending permits Pre-Publication Review completed within 24 hours. No reprographic issues with project Plans Job File submitted within 96 hours of project submittal Project submitted with Funding documentation Job File submitted with covers, section dividers and two-hole punched Supplemental Project Information includes 70% of all available permits and status of pending permits Pre-Publication Review completed within 48 hours. No reprographic issues with project Plans Job File submitted within 120 hours of project submittal Project submitted with Funding documentation Job File submitted with section dividers and two-hole punched Supplemental Project Information includes less than 70% of all permits Either no attempt to meet or requires significant effort to meet DES OE requirements for processing Page 30

Construction Protective Features (Page 1 of 2) Construction Access TMP(Traffic Management Plan) Elements 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Construction Access clearly addressed. From contractor s perspective, it has all elements to plan access to the work area. It provides safe environment for the public including pedestrian and bike traffic, contractor personnel and equipment near the construction access area. TMP clearly addresses all traffic issues by fully utilizing various methods for communication to traveling public. Provides safe and maximum window for construction. Reduces public exposure to construction operations. Defined safe entry and exit to the work area including access for heavy equipment; Provide clear access for equipment. Good access through the construction site for pedestrian, bike and vehicular traffic TMP addressed the issues by utilizing various methods for communication to traveling public. Sufficient construction window provided. Reduces public to construction operations exposure. Some potential conflicts with minimal impacts to Access or Staging. Acceptable access for pedestrian and bike traffic through the construction site. TMP addressed most of the issues but questions still remain. Reduces most construction operations exposure. Undefined entry and exit to the work area including access routes. Potential conflicts with impacts to Access or Staging. Issues with pedestrian and bike traffic through the construction areas. TMP does not address all the issues creating potential operations exposure and traffic delays. Construction Access not addressed. Access for vehicular, bike and pedestrian traffic not addressed. TMP not addressed. Traffic Handling Plan Staging Ability to Meet OSHA Requirements Traffic handling matches with stage construction. Language to coordinate with various local sport/public events in addressed in the specs (Order of work). Maximize traffic flow with good traffic signal timing and coordination. Clear and concise staging plans with no flaws and specifications for logical job flow with standard construction method and relatively low risk. Facilitates efficient construction activities and movement of traffic through the construction site All relevant requirements and concerns are included in the SSP. No missing safety detail spec such as lead compliance plan, ADL training. Just in time training for example how to work around project that required Blasting or working near a rail road. Traffic handling plan and stage plan address the traffic issues in sufficient detail. Good detail plan to address traffic flow through the construction areas. Adequate staging plans with no flaws and specifications for logical traffic flow with standard construction method and medium risk level. Balanced staging to address both traffic handling and materials flow. All relevant requirements and concerns are included in the SSP. No missing safety detail spec such as lead compliance plan, ADL training. Just in time training for example how to work around project that required Blasting or working near a rail road. Traffic control and handling criteria reasonable. It has most major aspect for traffic handling with minor flow or adjustment. Example, (should have 2 left turn lanes instead of 1) Marginally designed staging plans and specifications. Acceptable match with traffic handling details. Requires some effort in the field to implement successfully. Contractor can make things work with some effort. Project is buildable but may have potential for few problems. All major requirements are met. Only minor detail missing. Traffic handling and control addressed marginally. inadequate information on plan sheets and SSP. Not well designed staging plans and brief specifications resulting in an unconventional working environment for the contractor. No definite direction for contractor to plan his activities efficiently. Project is buildable but has several potential problems. Marginally meet all the requirements and concerns. Some details are not addressed adequately. Potential for some risks during construction. Traffic handling not addressed. Major flaws and missing important elements. Staging plans and specifications not provided. Conflicting and missing information. Unbuildable and unbalance earth work in each stage. Missing details result in traffic congestion. Unconventional construction method and sequences. Contract specifications do not address all the anticipated issues. Example missing lead plan, and pay item for removal and disposed of old yellow stripe and thermal plastic traffic stripe. Page 31

Protective Features Construction (Page 2 of 2) High Risk Facilities/Utilities 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant High risk facilities/utilities do not pose a conflict for a contractor's operations or they are relocated outside the work area. All physical and policy conflicts investigated in detail, resolved, and shown on plans and SSPs. All potential physical and policy conflicts addressed adequately in the plans and SSPs. All physical and policy conflicts addressed marginally in the project plans and SSPs. Conflicting utilities have not been identified. Trenching and Shoring Trenching and shoring issues are addressed without any conflicts or ambiguity in the project plans and specifications. Trenching and shoring issues are addressed adequately without any conflicts in the project plans and specifications. Acceptable Information available in the Trenching and Shoring addressed Trenching and Shoring issues not specifications and plans to handle without any details in staging plans and addressed. trenching and shoring issues. May need may cause conflicts. However, special additional effort during construction. provisions available to mitigate conflicts. Falsework Falsework conflicts are addressed in Plans including Structure, Staging and TMP and stage construction plan. TMP address both vertical and Provide adequate details on the plans to horizontal clearances. Detailed accommodate both vertical and information for the contractor to build horizontal clearances for falsework Falsework without any conflicts and construction and access. access through the construction site. Adequate vertical and horizontal clearances provided and addressed in the TMP and staging plans. Vertical and horizontal clearance issue addressed marginally on the plan sheets. Needs review of structure plans to figure the details. No details provided on TMP and staging plans. Falsework conflicts not addressed clearly on the project plans and in the special provisions Detour Safety Detour well designed with shortest route with fewer left turns. Good coordination with cities. Pedestrian and Cyclist access and detours clearly addressed. Good supplemental funds provided in the contract to provide local police assistance to control the traffic intersections. Good Construction Area Signs and Acceptable Detour plans. Local Traffic Handling Plans provided to agencies concurrence obtained in accommodate travelling public including diverting traffic through local streets. pedestrians and cyclists through the construction area. Marginal traffic handling plans. Local Agencies not involved with the design. May cause coordination issues during construction. Insufficient traffic signage. Extensive detour through residential area. Inadequate bridge loading capacity to support Truck traffic Minimize Night Work Great staging plans. Optimized working conditions to schedule work efficiently. Provide easement to work behind k-rail. Night work avoided without impact to scope, schedule and cost. Night work minimized with good engineering measures. Staging plans well designed to accommodate most of the work to be performed during day light and weekends. Reasonable night work. Minor adjustment to schedule and staging to move the work window and operation to another time. Minor adjustments in the field to optimize productivity. Work windows and work schedule not well thought out. Staging plans do not address the issue of minimizing night work. Not well planned to address night work requirements. No weather or staging work taken into consideration. Construction Methods Designed to construct with local materials and equipment efficiently. Optimized to build utilizing local standard construction engineering practices and methods. The project designed well to be built efficiently using locally available materials and standard engineering practices. Project construction designed to be built using local materials and equipment and standard equipment adequately. Marginal attention paid to using locally available materials and the design may require specialized equipment and methods to complete the project. Untested and risky construction methods. Local materials and methods not specified or underutilized. Very inefficient. Page 32

Construction Construction Contract Standard Compliance (Page 1 of 2) Right of Way Access Permits Available in Contract Non-conflicting Permit Windows Subsurface Information Complete Adequate Work Windows Available Materials Sources Page 33 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Before the project is advertised, the R/W and temporary easements issues are completely resolved. The utility relocation plans are complete; agreements are in place to complete utility relocation prior to start of construction. There is minimum traffic impact to the local residents and businesses. TMP and traffic control plans in place with concurrence with the local cities input. All the Permits including Railroad permits are identified and approved by the authorities. Special Provision includes the list of permits, responsible parties, how they are going to be implemented and any restrictions and management of potential risks. Special Provisions and the Permit Documents provide details of various permit restrictions. Tables, charts are included to show permit implementation details. Subsurface information complete. Both materials and geotechnical reports available. All underground facilities are shown on plans and profiles. Boring logs provided in the plans. Adequate work windows are provided in the special provisions to the Contractor to work on the project efficiently and minimize any delays to the public. Good cooperation with local cities for managing traffic through the construction area. Contingency plans in place to minimize the impacts to the local residents and businesses. Materials report identifies locally available materials. The project is designed to construct the project using standard engineering practices and locally available materials. R/W and temporary construction easements are acquired before the project is advertised for construction. Utilities plans complete and relocation well planned to be completed either before or during the construction. Minimum impacts to local residents and businesses. Adequate traffic management and controls in place. The permits are defined. All of the permits are approved by the authority. The Special Provisions do include the list of the permits but there is limited information related to the implementation etc. Permit documents and Special Provisions provide adequate information regarding non-conflicting permit windows. The subsurface and utility plans are included with profile. Information in Geotechnical report and materials report are adequate. Adequate work windows provided to work efficiently with minimum delays. The work windows, freeway closures, and coordination with the agencies are addressed. Locally available materials specified and standard equipment adequate to construction the project efficiently. R/W access and temporary easements to the job site available with some impacts to local residents and businesses. Need some modification during construction. All the required approved permits are included. However, the Special Provisions provides limited information on the details including responsibility and implementation. Non-conflicting permit window details not clearly shown in the Special Provisions. There is potential for conflicts due to restrictions from various permit requirements. Limited subsurface information available in geotechnical and materials reports. The reports are not very detailed and provide information for general area. Acceptable work windows provided in the special provisions. There is minimum potential for any delays or conflicts. May not have enough time to clean up after shift work. Standard materials required and generally available to industry; however, potential problem or delay as a result of the materials sources. Temporary easements are tight or limited to the job site and may impact the local access. Traffic control and monitoring is not efficient and may impact travelling public. Permits are available, however, limited information provided in the Special Provisions regarding implementation and restrictions of the permits. Permit restrictions and the non conflicting windows not shown adequately in the special provisions. There is risk potential that may cause conflict between the permit windows. work schedule and the CPM There is limited information included in the Geotechnical and the materials reports. Most of the Subsurface facilities are shown on the plans without details of location. Potential for problems during construction. Work windows may not be adequate and cause potential issues related to work efficiency, freeway openings and conflicts with the local agencies. Designer did not consider the availability of materials locally and the equipment available in the area to construct the project. Need for additional R/W access to work site. Unspecified easement; Conflicting between staging and R/W condition. Condition of contract does not match with RW condition. Required permit documents are not provided and the required permit information is missing in the Special Provisions. Permit information not available. No subsurface information available. Potential for conflicts for underground utilities may require additional subsurface investigation. Potential for work window restrictions and impacts to schedule. Work window not adequate for proposed work. Potential for delays, late openings and accidents. Unreasonable work expectation. Materials report not available. Project may require using no standard equipment, methods and import materials. There is great potential for delays and claims.

Construction Construction Contract Standard Compliance (Page 2 of 2) Complete Materials Information Package Staging Plans Complete Working Days Accurate Accurate Pay Clause and Quantities 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant The specifications for the materials to be used in the project are well defined in the special provisions and standard specifications and project plans if applicable. No conflict between the stages of construction and the staging meets all the milestones. Facilitates safe and efficient construction. Traffic handling, permit restrictions and schedule are met without any issues. Every stage meets the traffic handling, permit restrictions and the schedule requirements. Accurate working days provided for completion of the project safely and efficiently. In addition, adequate lead time provide to procure required materials and obtain approvals on the submittals. Pay clauses and Item quantities accurate. Quantities shown on project plan and in the special provisions match perfectly. The pay clauses are appropriate and clear and will minimize any claims. The specifications for the materials are referred to the standard specifications whereas there is limited info for the non-standard materials in the special provisions. Staging design complete. No conflicts anticipated. Staging design will facilitate safe and efficient construction. Project working days accurate for procurement, submittals and construction without any schedule issues. The quantities shown on project plans and special provisions match with the engineers estimate. Pay clauses are detailed to address any issues with item payments. Information for the non-standard and standard materials provided in the specifications is acceptable. Staging design complete with minor issue overlooked. Has potential for minor conflicts and issues that can be addressed during construction. Acceptable working days provided. Lead time for procurement and submittals is acceptable. Pay clauses and quantities on all major items accurate. There are issues with pay clauses for a few minor items or non standard pay units. May cause some conflict and risks during construction including claims. More information is needed to cover the specifications for the materials to be used in the project. Although the staging design is complete. There is risk in the staging meeting the minimum requirements for milestones, conflict with the permits and project schedule. There is a potential risk due to insufficient working days and lead time provided to complete the project. There are minor differences for quantities shown on project plans, special provisions and engineer's estimate. Pay clauses not detailed and missing for some items. Potential for claims. Materials information is not complete for proper execution of the project. Construction staging not considered in detail. May result in staging conflict regards to permit windows, milestones and project schedule. Working days calculated not accurate. Will have severe impact on the construction schedule and costs. Lead time to procure materials and submittals not provided. Conflicts exist in pay clauses or quantities. Non standard pay unit or lack of pay units in the special provisions and project plans. Liquidated Damages, incentives/disincentives, and lane rental rates The liquidated damages, incentives/disincentives, and lane rental rates are calculated based on the facts and as per the guidelines. Liquidated damages, incentives, lane rental amounts are reasonable Acceptable Liquidated damages, incentives, lane rental amounts provided in the contract. Potential for some risks during construction. The numbers given for the liquidated damages, incentives & disincentives not consistent with industry standard. High potential for disputes and claims. No information provided in the special provisions. Page 34

Construction Constructible Subsurface Work Strategy Aerial Clearances Material Handling & Staging Traffic Control & Handling Criteria Permit Restrictions Working Day/Schedule Analysis 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Subsurface work strategy addressed. All conflicts clearly identified without any omission. Aerial clearances adequate. Plans adequately address all overhead clearance issues. Coordination with electrical companies to relocate or remove prior to construction. Material handling and staging addressed. Good access and staging location. Everything taken care of. Excellent Traffic control and handling plans. Very low traffic impact to traveling public with many safety features. Permit windows and restrictions well coordinated at all stages and provide adequate time to complete the work. All permits requirements are covered. CPM Schedule analysis performed to determine working days. Consistent with similar projects and reasonable. Utilities Relocation Utility relocation planned to be complete prior to construction. Utility relocation coordination showed on both utility plans and stage construction plans. R/W Construction Easements Right of Way construction easements acquired. No conflicts, no omission information in the contract. Language provided for the contractor to maintain access for local residents and businesses. Fabrication / Lead Time Fabrication submittal lead time allotted in schedule and appropriated. Good delay start and working days allocated for the appropriate work. Hazardous Materials All aspects of hazardous materials considered. Special Provision addresses details of handling and disposing of hazardous materials on site based on all regulations. All potential conflicts with the existing underground utilities reviewed and addressed. Adequate plans for construction. All potential aerial clearance issues addressed. Staging and utility plans well designed to avoid any conflicts. Adequately designed and staged to address materials and equipment movement during construction at the jobsite. Adequate traffic handling plans and staging plans to handle traffic detours during construction. Permit windows and restrictions well addressed in the SSP with minimal risks for construction and public at all stages. Schedule analysis done with CPM and working days estimate adequate to construct the project. All utility relocation discussed with the Utility companies and cooperative agreements signed. Time line provided in the SSP for utility relocation. All right of way related documents available. Adequate temporary R/W easements indicated on the plans. Also, contract language provided in the SSP to maintain local access during construction. Enough lead time allocated for obtaining required materials and submittal approvals. Specials provisions languages clear on the schedule of procuring materials. Special provisions has taken in consideration all the latest regulations involving handling and disposing of hazardous materials. Potential utility conflicts shown on the plans may make field operations complicated. Clearly indicated on the utility plans and stage construction plans Material handling and staging addressed with moderate access, minor inconvenience. Traffic control and handling criteria reasonable. Issue arising at the field level is easily solvable. Permit restrictions do not conflict and provide adequate time to complete work Schedule analysis done to determine working days Utility relocation completed partially prior to start of construction. During construction, utility relocation not conflicting with contractor's activities. Right of way information provided in the specs and on plan sheets not complete for construction and maintaining access during construction. However, project is still biddable. Fabrication submittal lead time considered. Delay start could be too long or too short but still acceptable. Acceptable details provided in handling hazardous materials and adequate language provided in special provisions. Conflicts identified in the as built plans not completely addressed and transferred to the new plan sheets. Open for potential conflicts Staging plans and utility relocation plans are not well coordinated. Exposure to field issues pertaining to vertical and horizontal clearances during construction. Required clearances and access for heavy equipment not well addressed. May have potential issues for the contractor during construction. Traffic handling plans and staging plans have many shortcoming including detour, temporary road widths and access for heavy vehicles. All potential permit issues not considered and addressed in the plans and specifications. No detailed schedule analysis performed and the number of working days is inadequate to complete the project. No detailed utility relocation plans and not coordinated with the staging plans. Potential for construction delays. Information provided is not very clear and may cause potential project delays. Potentially risky for all stakeholders. Not adequate time for submittal approvals, fabrication and procurement of materials addressed. Specifications inadequate and not current to handle hazardous materials. Subsurface work strategy including excavation, drilling and trenching operations not addressed. Aerial clearances inadequate and utility relocation not addressed clearly. Not addressed. Will cause several issues during construction. Traffic control and handling criteria too restrictive, sub standard or violate current policy. Permit restrictions conflict and do not provide adequate time to complete work. Potential for high risk around environmentally sensitive areas. No schedule analysis done to determine working days. Potential high risks completing the project in reasonable time. Utility relocation not addressed completely on the plans and in the specifications. Missing or incomplete information. Potential for high risk to project schedule. Right of Way construction easements not addressed either on the plans or the specifications. Potential for safety issues. No language provided for the contractor to maintain local access. No fabrication submittals lead time allotted in the schedule. Either Impossible to perform or delay the work. Few provisions to handle the hazardous materials safely and specifications are not complete. Page 35

Structure Construction Constructible (1 of 3) Subsurface Work Strategy Traffic Control/Handling Criteria Permit Restrictions Utility Conflicts Construction Operation laydown area Stage construction 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Foundation type meets field conditions. No Permit restriction conflicts. Borings at each foundation location. Water table with date data considered. Contaminated/hazardous soils identified and disposal addressed. Wet hole" specification and payment. Large staging/work area for equipment provided. Safe practical detours, staging areas. Closure durations sufficient for operations with no penalty & bid risk. Traffic impact outreach to public. Permit windows/restrictions coordinated w/staging and structure details. Operational work windows in phase with advertise, award start work schedule. Future/active utilities identified/addressed. Little to no potential for impacts to construction operations/schedule Excellent onsite laydown areas for equipment, falsework, shoring and other temporary works erection/removal. Material handling areas considered. Stage construction safe and efficient. Excellent operation flexibility within staging. All staging operations match work seasons and permit restrictions. Foundation type meets field conditions. Permit restrictions addressed with minor impacts to operations. Sufficient location and number of borings with water table considered. Contaminated/hazardous soils identified and disposal addressed. Wet hole spec/payment included. Staging/work area for equipment provided. Detours and staging areas tight but sufficient.. Closure durations sufficient for operations with minimal. Outreach to public considered. Permit windows/restrictions considered with resulting minimal risk to schedule. No potential for oneseason schedule bust. Minor utility relocations required with minimal potential schedule impacts. Adequate area for equipment, falsework, shoring and other temporary works erection/removal. Material handling areas considered. Stage construction well detailed with minor conflicts easily addressed at construction stage. Some operation flexibility. Work/permit windows match dependant stages. Foundation type reasonably meets field conditions with potential for constructive changes in pile size, number and spacing to address conflicts such as subsurface infrastructure and/or cobbles, boulders or water table. Contaminated/hazardous materials considered but not addressed adequately by item or spec w/additional minor costs anticipated. Underground drainage/utility conflicts shown on plans may complicate operations. Provided detours reasonable. Closure durations tight so bids may include some risk. Most work can be performed w/minimal impacts to local business' and public. Some major permit restriction conflicts with staging and structure details. Slight "start work" delay may bring risk for work window bust (season). Structure and excavation utility conflicts considered with relocation contemplated during project. Schedule dependent on outside agency with notification/duration agreements in place. Laydown and staging areas for falsework, pile, shoring and other work operations considered and without conflicts. Reasonable stage construction details. Some minor issues relating to work window restrictions. Limited operation options & flexibility with potential for delays. Questionable foundation/pile type. Missing information on borings, pile details and specifications. Conflicts with pile size, tip elevation and Foundation Report and borings. Minimal number of borings. Some overhead conflicts with pile driving/operations equipment. Underground drainage/utility conflicts are not contemplated with resulting ROW delay potential.. Provided detours are impractical and closure durations insufficient for work operations. Risk of late opening penalties likely included in bids. Major impacts to local businesses and residents Permit windows and restrictions not fully considered. Major risk to schedule and cost. Environmental permit restrictions considered but not adequately addressed. Structure and excavation utility conflicts considered with relocation contemplated during project. Schedule very dependent on outside agency. Work operations complicated due to tight work areas. Some of operations require use of traveled way with impacts to local traffic, business and residents. Poor and inefficient stage construction details. Work operation(s) not included in stages. Seasonal work window issues leading to schedule delays. Potential for CRIP to change stages.. Inappropriate foundation type. Pile type, size or tip elevation does not match the site, foundation report and/or the test borings. Water table elevation not shown. Insufficient/inappropriate boring locations. Major overhead and below grade utility or other conflicts not contemplated. Major work window restrictions will result in schedule bust. Hazardous Materials mentioned but handling and reimbursement not addressed. Required detours not provided. Insufficient or missing closure durations. Permit work windows/restrictions conflict with staging and structure details and will likely result in costly delays. Environmental/other permit restrictions not considered. Serious structure utility relocation or ROW conflicts not contemplated with resulting major bid approval or schedule impacts. Work operations/scheduled dependant on outside agencies with no relocation agreements. Work operations complicated due to very tight work areas. Majority of operations require use of traveled way with major impacts to local traffic, business and residents. Stage construction details and detours contain major conflicts. Over/underlapping work operations. Areas not available due to missing stage or under lap. Work windows and seasons not considered. Potential for major delays. Serious safety issues. Traveled way widths inadequate. Public and worker safety issues. Page 36

Structure Construction Constructible (2 of 3) Materials/Fabrication 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Clear QA requirements for welding, precast and high performance materials. Excellent local Material readily availability. Using latest state of the art materials. New and innovative materials Clear QA requirements for welding, precast and high performance materials. Local Material availability. Bridge/Structure Type. Bridge/structure type (superstructure/foundations) fits need, staging, site, maintenance considerations and material availability. No change necessary. Sound Wall/Retaining Wall Retaining Wall type appropriate for construction staging, soil/rock properties, water table, material availability wall height. Drainage and long term maintenance considered. Sound Wall Type - Construction staging considered foundation type appropriate for ground conditions. All QA requirements for welding procedures precast and high performance materials addressed. Local material sources considered. Long timeliness for procurement of materials. Some missing QA specifications. Material availability concerns. May require some clarification and changes/cost during construction. Long timeliness for procurement of materials. Missing QA specifications. Serious material availability concerns. Inappropriate bridge/structure type with respect to site, staging, material availability. CRIP to change structure type very likely. Long-term structure maintenance not considered or costly due to structure type. Falsework spans not considered or impractical to construct. Falsework erection not considered in Lane Closure Charts and/or TMP. Retaining and Sound Wall type inappropriate for in-situ soil/rock conditions and/or stage construction. Material availability problems and/or inappropriate foundation type. Structure/Roadway compatibility All bridge/structure profiles and grades match roadway and adjacent infrastructure profiles, grades and x-slopes. Minor profile or grade issues easily addressed during construction with minimal quantity and cost impacts. Bridge/structure profiles reasonably match roadway and adjacent profiles, grades and x-slopes with some inconsistencies that can be readily addressed with minor quantity and detail changes. Bridge/Structure profiles or x-slopes do not match roadway, grade or adjacent infrastructure requiring re-design or major quantity changes. Bridge/Structure profiles or x-slopes do not match roadway, grade or adjacent infrastructure requiring re-design and major quantity changes. Structure drainage system is not connected to the district system. Falsework is not compatible with roadway work. Bridge Specs and Details Removal operations No missing details, dimensions, pay clauses, items, camber information, reports. All are consistent. Special Provisions included for all detail work. Complete bridge removal specifications addressed in special provisions, staging and TMP (closure charts). Full freeway closure provided as needed. Roadway/infrastructure protection requirements with damage repair specs included. Removal limits clearly identified. Removal options provided. Clear public outreach requirement - advance signing, etc. Few missing details and dimensions. Very minor inconsistencies with details, pay clauses and items. All easily addressed in construction stage. Convenient traffic detours and closures. Bridge removal operations and removal plans addressed in special provisions, staging and TMP (closure charts). Demolition Plan specification provided w/pe requirement and roadway protection requirements. Some missing details, dimensions, pay clauses and items but none that would result in major cost changes to project. Minor detailing and specification inconsistencies. Bridge removal operations addressed in Specials Provisions, staging and TMP. Demolition Plan specification provided w/pe requirement and roadway protection requirements. Traffic staging, detours and closures considered. Numerous missing details, dimensions and items. Minor quantity errors, missing and inconsistent pay clauses, special provisions and items. Some detail conflicts and member congestion. Potential for significant cost to address all inconsistencies. Bridge removal operations not consistently addressed in Specials Provisions, staging and TMP. Some conflicts with minor resulting costs. Demolition Plan specification provided w/pe requirement and roadway protection requirements. Many missing or inconsistent major details, dimensions, pay clauses, items, reports, special provisions or QA requirements. Major congestion issues relating to reinforcement, hinge restrainer beams, pre-stress components, bearings and other major bridge structural components. Serious cost implications. Inadequate lane/freeway closure durations for safe removal. Piecemeal removal required with public safety issues. Removal work not addressed in TMP. Live utilities on structure with no relocation provisions. Demolition Plan specs missing or inadequate. Page 37

Structure Construction Constructible (3 of 3) Coordination Work Day/Schedule Analysis 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Minimal to no Railroad, local agency or other infrastructure, utility or agency dependence/involvement. Required Agreements in place. No conflicts with adjacent projects. Sufficient # Working days provided. No risk. Minimal schedule or cost ties to adjacent projects. Railroad or other major infrastructure agencies addressed in staging, details, schedule coordination and cost w/agreements. Project/structure construction details and schedule are not dependent on adjacent projects. Sufficient # Working days provided. Little to no risk. Railroad or other major infrastructure agencies considered in staging, details, schedule coordination and cost. No major schedule, staging or detail ties/conflicts with adjacent projects, Sufficient # of working days. Potential for some minor ROW, weather or delays. Heavy adjacent Railroad or other major infrastructure agencies involvement. Agreements in place and considered in specs but costly delays likely. Heavy schedule or staging ties to adjacent projects/agencies. Questionable number of working days. Contractor will likely incorporate risk into bid. Adjacent Railroad or other major infrastructure agencies not considered in staging, details, schedule coordination and cost. Major schedule, detail or staging conflicts with adjacent projects not addressed in contract. CPM missing or overlapping activities in the same work area. Working days insufficient. Major liquidated damages risk. Page 38

Traffic Operations Protective Features Clearances Sight Distance Historical Analysis 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Clearances met without mitigation measures. There is room for future needs. Sight distance met without mitigation measures required. Future needs have been considered Safety/Collision analysis completed. The project includes the projection of the proposed project into the future. Safety/Collision recommendations if any are addressed and incorporated in the project cost, scope and project design. Clearances met based on minimum standards requirements. Fact sheet provided Sight distances (stopping/corner and decision) met based on minimum standard requirements. Safety/Collision analysis completed and meets with the minimum standard requirements. Safety/Collision recommendations if any are incorporated in cost/scope/design. Clearances met with minor mitigation measures. Fact sheet provided Sight distance (stopping, sight, corner, & decision) met with mitigation measures included Safety/Collision analysis completed with some minor errors and some if not all Safety/Collision recommendations included in scope/cost/estimate (due to funding limitations). Clearances not completely met. Not sufficient mitigation measure provided. Sight distances did not completely meet. There are possible mitigation measure, but not included. Safety/ collision analysis is not completed and has many errors. Only limited discussion of lighting / safety devices upgrades included in scope/cost/design Clearance not regarded. No mitigation measures. Sight distance requirements disregarded No safety/collision analysis completed; no discussion of lighting / safety devices upgrades included in scope/cost/design, Traffic Control / Handling Criteria Safety Features Discussion/application of traffic handling is detailed with sufficient information and without conflicts. Complete TMP plan is included; advance equipments such as PCMS, and CCTV are considered. Alternative solutions are provided as back-up if needed. It complies fully with MUTCD, HDM and Transportation Management Plan Guidelines. Discussion/application of ADA elements, Collision analysis, and Safety index are fully included. The project is designed such that requires none or minimum need for the installation of safety devices like MBGR, crash cushion, etc. Room for future needs of clear recovery zones and sight distances are considered. Discussion/application of traffic handling is covered with sufficient information and without conflicts. TMP elements such are detour plan and lane closure schedule included. Discussion/application of safety features such as left turn pockets, rumble strips shoulder widths, clear recovery zones & side slopes meet the minimum required standard and included in project scope, cost and design. The project considered the proper selection and application of correct safety devices. All fixed objects such as control box, signs, drainage facilities, etc. are located outside of the CRZ. Discussion/application of traffic handling with limited details and few minor errors. Complies with minimum requirements per MUTCD and HDM guidelines. Discussion/application of traffic safety features with minor incomplete issues and errors. Limited discussion/application on traffic handling with many correctable errors. Does not fully comply with MUTCD and TMP guidelines Very Limited discussion/application on traffic safety features. Incomplete safety analysis with many errors. Improper selection and application of safety devices. No discussion/application on how traffic will be handled during and post construction. No detour plan. No mention of safety features. No safety analysis provided Page 39

Traffic Operations Design Standard Compliance MUTCD Signing 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Complete signing plan. All signs within the project limits, but not as a part of the project, are upgraded to have the same shade and reflectivity. Plans are designed per the most current MUTCD guidelines. The size and location of signs consider the future needs for changes and modification. Signing plans include the minimum standards required per current MUTCD guidelines. All of the recommendations have been addressed and included in the scope and cost estimate. Signing plans meet the very minimum requirements per current MUTCD standard. There are only few minor errors. Some minor recommendations have not been implemented. Incomplete signing plan. Many minor errors. Sign details are missing. Improper application of the current MUTCD signing standards. Signing plans are missing or incomplete with many major errors. Does not meet the current MUTCD signing requirements. MUTCD Markings Complete striping plan for pavement markings. All markings within the project limits are upgraded to have the same shade and reflectivity. Plans are designed per the most current MUTCD guidelines Pavement markings, delineation and striping plans include the minimum standards required per current MUTCD guidelines. All of the elements have been included in the scope and cost estimate. Pavement Markings and striping plans meet the very minimum MUTCD standard requirements. There are only few minor errors. Some minor elements have not been included. Incomplete striping and pavement marking plan. Many minor errors. Details are missing. Improper application of MUTCD marking standards. Striping and delineation plans are missing or incomplete with many major errors. Does not meet the current MUTCD striping requirements. Temporary Traffic Control (Staging Plans only) Advanced equipments and methods are used to support project during each stage, such as PCMS, CMS, CCTV; notification and public awareness by media, Temporary signing and marking plans have been designed per temporary traffic control MUTCD. Advance warning, CMS, Temporary traffic control for staging plans met the minimum standards requirements. Temporary signing and marking plans have been designed per temporary traffic control MUTCD guidance. The plans include consideration of additional areas beyond the scope of the work zone. Temporary signs and markings have been designed per temporary traffic control MUTCD guidance with few minor errors and omissions. Staging plans may have a few concerns that may be able to be addressed. Temporary signs and markings have been designed per temporary traffic control MUTCD guidance with correctable errors and omissions. There are major errors on the stage construction plans and even concerns with the staging of traffic that need to be addressed. Does not comply with MUTCD and HDM. Lacks clear communication. No smooth continuity. Electrical Design Complete electrical design (plan, specifications, and estimate) and is compatible with other project components. Future needs are considered. All electrical elements of the project are updated according to the latest technology. Strong evidence that Elec. Design and Electrical Systems branches involved. Meets the required Caltrans standards. Electrical Design work is included in the scope. The design includes enough details on the plans, specifications and estimate. Evidence of Electrical Design and Electrical Systems Branches involved. Electrical design work is included in scope. Some minor correctable errors still exists and some questions remain on design and/or estimate. Minimal evidence of Electrical Design and Electrical Systems Branches involved. Meets the minimum standards. Some Electrical design work is missing in scope. Electrical plans, specification and estimate are complete; however, there many minor errors or a lack of enough details on the plan sheets. No evidence of Electrical Design and Electrical Systems Branches involved. No electrical design work is included in scope; yet needed. No evidence of Electrical Design and Electrical Systems Branches involved. Design not meeting standards and guidelines. Lacks details. Page 40

Traffic Operations Designed to Operate as Planned 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Operational Studies Bike/Pedestrian(Ped) Expectations TMP Elements ITS Elements Operational analysis completed. Recommendations included in scope/estimate/design. Most updated traffic volumes, Level Of Service (LOS) analysis, delay & congestion analysis and queue analysis provided. Future volumes and traffic data is projected. Computer Micro/Macro simulation is provided. Future needs such as adding mainline lanes, Aux. lanes and ramp widening have been considered. Benefit / cost analysis provided for all possible alternatives to compare options. Advanced traffic operation technology such as SWARM and remote ITS devices are considered. Complete plan, discussion and application of Bike, Pedestrian, and ADA elements. Include options for future expectations. Provide continuity within and beyond the limits of the project. Bike/Ped expectations have been discussed and any improvements have been included in scope and cost. Discussion on Ped/bike movements during construction has been addressed with costs included in estimate. Traffic Management Plan (TMP) elements identified and thoroughly discussed on how traffic will be handled during construction. Closure charts, cost and elements included in cost/scope/design. Plan has strong evidence of Traffic Operations involved. ITS elements discussed and identified and included in scope/cost/design, if any. Locations sites have strong evidence of Traffic Operations involvement. Met the expectations for the future upgrades such as CCTV, fiber optic system, CMS, SWRM, and satellite detection system. Operational analysis (including intersection analysis) completed and reviewed and approved by district's Traffic Operations and the analysis meets the minimum standard requirements. Most or all recommendations are included in scope/cost/design. Standard traffic analysis provided. Bike/Ped expectations have been discussed and any improvements have been included in scope and cost. Discussion on Ped/bike movements during construction has been addressed with costs included in estimate. Traffic Management Plan (TMP) elements identified with some discussion on how traffic will be handled during construction. Closure charts, cost and elements included in cost/scope/design. ITS elements discussed and identified and included in scope/cost/design, if any. Locations sites have some evidence of Traffic Operations involvement. Operational analysis (including intersection analysis) completed and reviewed but some questions remain with analysis; minor changes required. Some minor errors and missassumptions exist in the traffic operation analysis. Bike/Ped expectations have been discussed but improvements are limited due to funding/program limitations. There is some discussion on Ped/bike movements during construction but many questions remain. Some minor changes needed. Traffic Management Plan (TMP) elements identified but light on the discussion but some questions remain. Same for closure charts, cost and elements included in cost/scope/design. There are discussions on including ITS elements but installing them is limited due to funding/program limitations. Locations sites have evidence of Traffic Operations involvement. Operational analysis (including intersection analysis) has been completed but many questions and/or missing information still remain on the analysis as well as the scope/design/estimate. Many minor errors and wrong assumption exist in the traffic analysis. None or limited delay & congestion analysis provided. None or very limited benefit / cost analysis of possible alternatives are provided. Not complete with many minor errors. Not enough discussion/application of ADA elements. Lack of details. Lack of discussion/application of bike/ped facility TMP strategy touched on but many concerns still exist on whether impacts to traffic have been addressed. Limited TMP funds included in project. There is limited discussions/application on including ITS elements. No operational studies have been completed where it has been determined to be applicable. No tables of traffic data such as volumes, LOS analysis, delay & congestion analysis and queuing analysis have been provided Bike/Ped expectations have not been discussed and no improvements included in scope and cost. No discussion on Ped/bike movements during construction. No TMP plan identified nor discussed in project scope. No or very few funds included in project. No discussion on ITS elements and none are included in scope/cost. Page 41

Maintenance Protective Features (Page 1 of 2) Maintenance Road Access 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Maintenance Road access is provided and exceeds maintenance expectations Maintenance Road is sufficient for moving materials and operating equipment. Access provided from roadway. Maintenance Road is provided, but still requires a lane closure to operate equipment and perform Maintenance activities. Example: Access road is provided to get vehicles safely off the highway to do maintenance inspections, but the necessary equipment (such as augers/drill rigs, bucket trucks, etc.) that are used to perform maintenance activities (guardrail, sign installation, tree trimming, culvert/drainage inlet cleaning, etc) must be situated on the highway in order to perform the work which will require a lane closure to ensure public safety. Use of private property for access or requires climbing over fences and walls. No provisions. Requires backing of vehicles and equipment or repelling off a side slope/cliff. Example: A sand vault is located off the highway, beyond the right shoulder (but within the state R/W). An access road is provided to access the sand vault, but a vector truck will be required to turn around, facing oncoming traffic and reverse down the access road to perform maintenance activities on the sand vault. Example: Having to repel off a side slope or cliff along a coastal highway in order to inspect/maintain a retaining wall. Roadside Feature Access OSHA Requirements No Roadside features to maintain. Contains maintenance agreement. Features are located outside of clear recovery zone. No need for shielding. Met OSHA Requirements and exceeded maintenance expectations Roadside features located outside clear recovery and there is no need for shielding. Features are located within clear recovery, but shielded. Maintenance vehicle pullout placed safe and convenient location relative to the roadside feature. Requires climbing to perform maintenance activities (tree trimming). Features are located within clear recovery and Maintenance vehicle pullout provided, but not shielded. Requires trenching or excavation, working in median or sloped area using boom type equipment. Met OSHA Requirements Met OSHA requirements Minor change needed to meet OSHA requirements. Example: Working in a sand vault requiring training/certification for working in confined spaces. Implement an alternative BMP that will accomplish the same results other than a sand vault. Example: Maintenance of avalanche control equipment (Gaz-Ex canon) can only be accessed by hiking/climbing during non-snow season. No vehicle access. During snow conditions specialized equipment (snow cat) might be used. Total disregard to location, protection, and placement of roadside features (i.e. cabinets, pull boxes, controllers, signs). Requires trenching or excavation and working in confined spaces (special training required). OSHA requirements for reducing worker exposure not met. OSHA requirements disregarded. Example: Limited or restricted entry/exit or enclosed spaces when having to perform maintenance activities in vaults, vats, sumps, shafts, tanks, etc. Example: Working in trenches/excavation 5 feet and deeper without shoring or sloped. Page 42

Maintenance Protective Features Page 2 of 2) 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Bridge Access Access provided with no inconvenience to users, workers, and no special equipment needed. Access provided and requires use of specialized equipment. Access provided with some inconvenience to users Access only from water. Requires working in confined spaces requires scaling/climbing (special training required) or use of a UBIT. Inaccessible by workers and equipment. Example: Crawling through a concrete box girder bridge cell, or having to repel to access a bridge abutment/columns of a tall bridge or bridge located in a canyon, etc. Worker Exposure No exposure Exposure to live traffic is minimized and addressed with proper protection (concrete barrier or use of specialized equipment). Maintenance activity can be performed inside vehicle or equipment. No on-foot exposure. Exposure to live traffic is minimized with reasoning and justification. Use of MAZEEP, balsi-beam, shadow truck w/ attenuator and advanced warning vehicle. Exposure to live traffic minimized, excludes reasoning and justification for minimizing worker exposures. Shoulder or lane closure required. Exposure to live traffic, yet options to minimize exposure not accounted. Requires night work to perform maintenance activities, working confined spaces, near overhead lines. Page 43

Maintenance Maintainable Roadside Features Landscape Features Pavement Strategy Electrical Access Mechanical Access Bridge & Structure Access Inventory Resources Page 44 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Relinquished or reduced inventoryreduces need to maintain. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. Landscaping is consistent with adjacent corridor segments with minimum maintenance efforts without increased resource, full/safe access, no slopes, incorporate hardscaping features and inert ground cover Long life pavement strategy lasting more than 20 years Relinquish or reduced inventoryreduces Maintenance need to maintain. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. No lane closures required. Relinquish or reduced inventoryreduces Maintenance need to maintain. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. No lane closures required. Relinquish or reduced inventoryreduces Maintenance need to maintain. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. Relinquished or funding identified in PID No increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible with Delegated Maintenance Agreement. No mandates, restrictions or policy (such as for water usage) Landscaping is consistent with adjacent corridor segments with full access and no increase in inventory, no new landscape agreement, use of mulch/barriers/blankets to prevent weed growth and reduce herbicide spraying, installation of efficient/durable irrigation system Intermediate rehab pavement strategy lasting more than 10 years Increased inventory with increased resources and Delegated Maintenance Agreement. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. Increased inventory with increased resources. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. Increased inventory with increased resources. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. Increased inventory with a Delegated Maintenance Agreement in place. Increased inventory with increased resources. No permits required. Reduced equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. Use of drought tolerant plants. Landscaping is not consistent with adjacent corridor segments with some limited access and an increase in inventory, requiring landscape agreement, incorporate native and common to region plants Short term pavement strategy (CAPM) lasting 5-10 years No increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. No increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. No increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. No specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features easily, safely and conveniently accessible. No Increase Increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. Minor specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features safely accessible with minor inconvenience. Landscaping is inconsistent with adjacent corridor segments, Increase in inventory, increase in resource, access only from shoulder, Pavement marginally acceptable-does not address future pavement opportunities. Increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. Minor specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features safely accessible with minor inconvenience. No or minor increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. Minor specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Features safely accessible with minor inconvenience. Increase in inventory. No permits required. No new equipment needs. Minor specialized or proprietary equipment (UBIT), material or training of staff. Features safely accessible with minor inconvenience. Columns are shielded by barriers. Increased inventory with resource needs identified. Increase in inventory without identification of resources or significant new equipment needs or significant specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Permits required. Features not easily or safely accessible. No access from shoulder, unprotected and within the recovery area resulting in additional maintenance resource requirements, specialized equipment (personnel hoist) or training (climbing) required, no consideration for pruning, water management or drought tolerant/deep root vegetation. Degrade existing pavement condition without any consideration for pavement deterioration Increase in inventory without identification of resources or significant new equipment needs or significant specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Permits required. Features not easily or safely accessible. Significant increase in inventory without identification of resources or significant new equipment needs or significant specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Permits required. Features not easily or safely accessible. Increase in inventory without identification of resources or significant new equipment needs or significant specialized or proprietary equipment, material or training of staff. Permits required. Features not easily or safely accessible. Increased inventory with no resource needs identified.

Planning Purpose and Need (Page 1 of 3) Communication/Information Stakeholders Needs & Public Engagement 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant The transportation deficiencies(s) are clearly described. Detailed supporting data is intergraded into an easy to understand narrative that demonstrates the project value. Stakeholders (public) provided direct input into the P&N development (documented). Full consensus with stakeholders. Consistent with all stakeholders needs. Identified and addressed all stakeholders needs Includes documentation and discussion of stakeholders support or lack support for the project (has consistency been reached?). All partners, stakeholders, and the department staff were involved in the development with the P&N and consensus was achieved. Clearly identifies the transportation deficiencies and describes the underlying transportation need. Includes detailed supporting data that demonstrates the project value, but not integrated within the narrative. Most stakeholders' needs are meeting. All partners, stakeholders, and the Department staff were involved and majority agreed (enough not to impact the project). Documentation of stakeholders discussions but no documentation that they are supportive or unsupportive of the project (has consistency been reached?). Supported by a majority of stakeholders. Identifies and addressed most stake holders needs (critical needs plus). Stakeholders provided input into the P&N development. Identifies transportation, community, and environmental goals and addresses most. Not complete balance between goals, but is sensitive to all and integrates most. Engagement and support by most community groups and citizens. The project provides a solution that preserves transportation, community (since of place), and environment (natural and structural). Includes fundamental supporting data & background. Technical data validates project need (deficiencies). The information included in the document is organized in a manner that supports the P&N. Satisfies basic requirements for purpose and need. Public input has been considered before taking action on specific solutions Consensus from all primary stakeholders. Identified and addressed critical stakeholder s needs. Includes cursory supporting data with limited background. High levels of inconsistencies and errors (data and information). Transportation deficiency (need) and objective (purpose) is not clearly identified Supporting data does not clearly support the P&N. P&N statement so narrow that it excludes a full range of alternatives. Limited discussion and documented regarding consistence of purpose and need (was consistence achieved) Consensus of few primary stakeholders. Identifies needs without addressing the impacts (mitigation) No supporting data included in document(s). No "need" background narrative linking data to project need. Project purpose" is identified as the preferred alternative instead of the project objective. High levels of inconsistencies and errors (data and information). Stakeholders were not identified. No communication of stakeholder's needs. No outreach to special interest groups (e.g. under represented communities, elderly, physical challenged, non-drivers, pedestrians, bicycle, etc.). Page 45

Planning Purpose and Need (Page 2 of 3) Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) State Planning Consistency 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Project implements strategies identified from community plans. Complete balance between transportation, community and environmental goals. All transportation, environmental, and community goals have been identified and addressed. Full integration of CSS within the project development process. Full, continuous engagement and support by most community groups and citizens. The project provides a solution that includes enhanced transportation, community (since of place), and environment (natural and structural). Projects enhance, preserves, and provide complete statewide consistency and compatibility with current and future core adjacent projects and between corridors. Document identifies deficiencies/gaps within and between systems and provides solution. Project addresses locally defined needs and also addresses issues of statewide significance. Identifies transportation, community, and environmental goals and addresses most. Not complete balance between goals, but is sensitive to all and integrates most Engagement and support by most community groups and citizens. Provides a solution that preserves transportation, community (since of place), and environment (natural and structural). Project preserves the resources (ROW, land use) needed to maintain consistency with future statewide mobility and connectivity strategies. Projects preserves and provides statewide consistency and compatibility with current and future core adjacent projects and between corridors. Issues are identified but are not addressed within the design with explanation (constraints: funding, safety, environmental) Analysis includes estimates of full and long term proposal and assesses the potential of the alternate impacts on society and the environment. Engagement of special interest groups (e.g. under represented populations, elderly, physical challenged, non-drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, etc.). Not complete balance between goals, but addressed ones that are critical to avoid project delay. Summarizes community interaction and documents community comments. Provides a solution that is compatible with transportation, community (sense of place), and the environment (natural and structural). Identifies and address statewide policies, goals, strategies for the state transportation and is consistent with the statewide vision. Project is consistent with current and future statewide mobility and connectivity need and addressed where there are inconsistencies. Identified statewide policies and issues (goods movement, Strategic Growth Plan, etc.) that should be included in the project development process. Projects provide statewide consistency and compatibility with current core adjacent projects and between corridors. Not consistent with community values. Limited outreach; Communication was not maintained. Public involvement (just informed). Limited discussion of community issues and needs and how they will be addressed. Identifies but does not address statewide policies, goals, strategies for the state transportation system within the project limits. Addresses locally defined needs, and does not identify or address statewide issues or strategies. Meets the local transportation needs and identifies strategies to maintain the future performance of the transportation facilities only within the project limits. CSS values not consider. Does not identify or address statewide policies, goals, strategies for the state transportation system. System Planning Consistency Page 46 Enhances the system planning concept by exploring a broad range of modal options and land use characteristics that will impact the transportation system. Identified as a high priority project in the Transportation System Development Program Includes a discussion of how the project enhances the current/future facility. Includes discussion of how enhances the system planning concept (route/facility). Need identified from the Transportation Concept Report / Corridor System Management Plan Meets all strategies, goals, and objectives identified in the District System Management Plan Consistent and included in system planning documents and addresses compatibility issues that are critical to avoid project delay. Review existing system planning data and analysis to ensure project validity. Project is consistent and included in system planning documents and addresses compatibility issues that are critical to avoid project delay. All travel mode strategies have been considered and implemented along the corridor (on-system). Describes current and future facility. Purpose & Need is consistent with system planning TCR/CSMP strategies. Consistent system planning route and facility concept. Consistent DSMP mission, vision, objectives, and strategies. Consistent TSDP priority. Not consistent with system planning concepts (route/facility). Not included within TSDP. Not consistent with DSMP vision, objectives, strategies. Project does not consider system planning concepts or strategies. Does not consider TSDP. Does not consider DSMP.

Planning Purpose and Need (Page 3 of 3) Regional Planning Consistency 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant P&N is included and preserves and enhances regional and local mobility. Includes discussion of how project meets the regional vision, goals, and objectives. Project P&N is included and preserves and enhances regional and local mobility. Includes discussion of the regional vision, goals, and objectives. Consistent with but not identified in the RTP (supported by RTPA/MPO). Where inconsistent, there is a discussion of steps to be taken to achieve consistency. Consistent with regional vision, goals, and objectives. Included in RTP if the project is air quality non-exempt. Alternatives and combinations of solutions address and accommodate issues related to land use, air quality, energy, local/regional economy and equity. Consistent with but not identified in the RTP (not supported by RTPA/MPO). Not included or consistent or identified in the RTP. Multimodal System Mobility CT Functions Purpose and need enhances the multimodal transportation system. Comprehensive development and balance of all modes. Purpose and need provides consistent direction to achieve a balance between travel modes where applicable (pedestrians, bike, car, bus, etc...) All modes of transportation and alternatives are addressed and included within document. Balances/integrates all transportation modes on and off system (System Management). Complete integration of the mobility pyramid elements. All travel mode strategies have been considered and implemented (intermodal). Full participation by all functional units in development of P&N for all phases. Full interaction and communication by all functional representatives. Purpose and need supports a multimodal transportation system. Multimodal deficiencies identified and underlying need described (as applicable). All travel mode strategies have been considered and implemented along the corridor (on-system) Critical mobility issues have been identified and implementation strategies have been developed specific to the project site. P&N developed by critical functional units and other units of interest where appropriate. Interaction and communication by most functional representatives. P&N statement broad enough to allow for a full range of alternatives. All modal opportunities are investigated Early, objective multimodal (all applicable modes) analysis has been produced in partnership regional and local agencies, and transit operators. Critical mobility issues have been identified and implementation strategies have been developed specific to the project site. Enhanced integration and connectivity of the transportation system across and between modes is considered within the project. P&N developed with the minimum functional representation. Minimum interaction and commutation regarding project development by all critical functional units. P&N statement so narrow that it excludes a full range of alternatives. Most multimodal deficiencies identified but underlying needs not described. Mobility issues have been defined but no strategies have been identified for implementation. P&N developed without the minimum functional representation. Limited interaction and commutation regarding project development. Multimodal deficiencies not considered Mobility issues have not been considered. * P&N is developed without consolation of functional units. * No interaction and commutation regarding project development. Project Goals and Objectives Fully meets current and future transportation needs. Is precisely stated and supported. Is refined iteratively from planning through project approval. Consistent with future land use P&N - Goals and Objectives, Is comprehensive enough to allow for reasonable ranges of alternatives, but specific enough to limit the range of feasible alternatives. P&N - Goals and Objectives, Considers future land use. P&N - Goals and Objectives, considers future transportation systems, linkages, needs, and development. Basic discusses of goals and objectives with minimal link into P&N. Meets the transportation need. Is achievable. Is refined iteratively from planning through project approval. Discusses goals and objectives without clear link to purpose and need. Not supported by local and regional governments and the public. Does not meet the transportation need Is not achievable. No discussion of project goals or objectives. Page 47

Planning Designed to Operate as Planned (Page 1 of 4) Statewide Plan Consistency System Planning Consistency Regional Planning Consistency 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Includes a detailed discussion of how project addresses California State Transportation Plan's (CTP) vision, goals, and objectives. Includes discussion of how strategies CTP, State Transit Plan, State Rail Plan, & California Interregional Blueprint (CIB) strategies are fully implemented through the project. Considers capacity and access management at state, regional, corridor, and project level. Includes a detailed discussion DSMP vision, goals, and objectives and describes how they will be implemented through project. Included in Transportation Corridor Report (TCR)/ Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP). Discussion of how the project meets the strategies included in the CSMP. Identifies route/facility/ ultimate concepts and provides a detailed discussion of how project rates. Discussion of the projects priority via the Transportation System Development Program (TSDP). Includes a detailed discussion of how project addresses regional vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Project implements all existing strategies and exceeds existing requirements, i.e. blue print planning, Sustainable Community Strategies, etc. Includes a listing of all current and planned regional projects within and next to the project area and provides a narrative explaining how project fits into the regional transportation system. Identifies current and future local/regional land use development and provides discussion of how project fits within region. Includes a detailed discussion of how CTP's vision, goals, and objectives are addressed and within project. Includes discussion of how CTP, State Transit Plan, State Rail Plan, and CIB strategies implemented through the project. Includes a discussion DSMP vision, goals, and objectives as they related to the project. Included within system planning documents and addresses compatibility issues that are critical to avoid project delay. Identifies Route/Facility/Ultimate concepts and provides a discussion of how project rates (minimal). Included in the TSDP. Meets most objectives and strategies identified in the DSMP. Minimal discussion of the project relationship with system planning route and facility concepts. Includes a discussion of how project addresses with regional vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Includes a listing of all current and planned regional projects within the project area and provides a narrative of how explain how the project relates (within project area only). Identifies current local/regional development and provides discussion of how project fits within project area. Consistent with the CTP, State Transit Plan, State Rail Plan, and CIB. Identified TCR/CSMP strategies with minimal discussion. Identifies DSMP mission, vision, objectives, and strategies with minimal discussion. Identified within TSDP (as applicable). Identifies Route/Facility/Ultimate concepts. Includes project location and length. Minimal discussion of how project addresses regional vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Includes a listing of all current and planned regional projects within the project area, but does not provide a link. Identifies current and future local/regional land use development. CTP identified without any discussion of how the projects link with strategies. State Rail Plan, CIB, and State Transit Plan identified without any discussion of how the projects link with planned strategies. System Planning criteria are identify without a link to project. Not consistent with system planning concepts (route/facility). Included within TSDP. Identified the DSMP. Assess how project consistent with CSMP vision, objectives, strategies. Identifies regional vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP without discussion project link. Does not document current and planned regional projects within the project area. Project is included in the RTP, but not supported by the regional planning agency. Identifies current local/regional land use development (not future). Does not address regional planning consistency. CTP not considered. State Rail Plan not considered. State Transit Plan not considered. Does not consider system planning concepts or strategies. Does not consider TSDP. Does not consider DSMP. Does not include facility concept. Does not include route concept. Does not include ultimate facility. Does not include project location and length. Does not identify regional vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Project not included in the RTP. Does not identify local/regional land use development (current or future). Page 48

Planning Designed to Operate as Planned (Page 2 of 4) Air Quality Multimodal Non-Motorized 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Identifies all SCS strategies and provides a detailed description of how project fits in. Project implements all existing strategies and exceed existing requirements, i.e. blue print planning, Sustainable Community Strategies, etc. Includes a detailed discussion of how project addresses State Transit Plan vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Includes a detailed discussion of how project addresses Short and Long Range Transit Plans vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Multimodal concepts fully implemented. Full connectivity with existing & planned facilities. Complete balance between modes of operation. Includes a discussion of how the project relates to all transportation modes. Includes a detailed discussion of how project addresses District/and or Regional Bike Plan vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Non-motorized concepts fully implemented. Fully integrated with existing and planned facilities. Identified all SCS strategies and provides a description of how project fits in. Project implements most exiting air quality strategies. Improves multimodal travel without full integration of modes. Implements park and ride strategies for projects involving new freeways, interchanges, HOV lanes, lane additions, and transit facilities Improves all travel modes. Encourages and support alternative modes. Addresses non-motorized travel along and connecting with project. Identified all SCS strategies. Project is determined to be exempt from conformity. Meets existing air quality conformity standards for project type. Discusses opportunities and impacts to current and future transit service. Connects with existing and planned facilities. Some multimodal concepts implemented or omitted with reasonable justification. Considers Park and Ride facilities for projects involving new freeways, interchanges, HOV lanes, lane additions, and transit facilities Does not negatively impact multimodal travel. Lists impacts and opportunity for non-motorized travel, but does not provide guidance to ensure modal integration within the project limits. Some or all non-motorized concepts omitted with reasonable justification. ADA compliant (if applicable). Connectivity with existing and planned facilities Does not negativity impact nonmotorized travel. Project implements most exiting air quality strategies. Multimodal concepts identified but not discussed. Incomplete connectivity with current and planned facilities. Identifies non-motorized issues but does not identify solutions. Does not identify opportunities to enhance non motorized travel. Does not meet air quality conformity standards for project type. Project does not meet air quality targets identified in the Sustainable Community Strategies. Multimodal concepts not considered. Negatively impacts other travel modes. Non-motorized concepts not considered. Cannot meet ADA requirements. Identified safety impacts but does address. If project is inapplicable for this category it is not stated or addressed in document. Page 49

Planning Designed to Operate as Planned (Page 3 of 4) Goods Movement System Linkage and Policy (Function that Important) System Performance Page 50 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Includes a detailed discussion of how project addresses State Rail Plan vision, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Includes a detailed discussion of how project addresses GMAP, goals, and objective as identified in the RTP. Includes a discussion of how the project addresses current and future modal (GM) deficiencies. Project looks beyond the immediate solution to improve other (future) modal (GM) definiteness The project implements strategies identified in the State GMAP and regional freight plans. Project considers capacity and access management at state, regional, corridor, and project levels Project serves as a connecting link between all systems and modes and ensures system and modal integration outside project limits Full connectivity with existing & planned facilities. Complete balance between modes of operation. Includes a discussion of how the project serves as a connecting link between all systems and modes and ensures system and modal integration outside project limits. Identifies all transportation systems and provides discussion of how project fits into the system(s) within region. Project improves current and future system performance beyond what is identified in state, local (FP), and regional plans. All travel mode strategies have been considered and implemented along the corridor (on-system). Includes discussion of strategies identified in GMAP and regional freight plans, etc. (as applicable). Full connectivity with existing and planned facilities. Improves multimodal travel without full integration of modes. Identifies future and current system linkages and provides guidance to ensure system and modal integration within of the project limits. Identifies all transportation systems and provides discussion of how project fits into the systems within project area. Enhances system performance within the corridor while providing modal capacity and access management. Project enhances the integration and connectivity of the transportation system across and between modes for freight. Consistent with the State GMAP, Transit Plan and Regional Freight Plans, etc. Identifies future and current system linkages, but does not provide guidance to ensure system and modal integration within the project limits. Supports the economic vitality of the US, State etc by providing accessibility to all systems. Identifies all transportation systems within project area. Enhances the system performance within project limits and does not negatively impact travel modes. Balances system performance between competing needs (i.e. commuters and freight) and modes. Does not degrade safety, mobility and travel Does this facility serve a rural, urban, or urbanizing area. Describes if the facility primarily serves inter-regional, intra-regional, or intra-community travel Provides system continuity (rural, urban, or urbanizing area). Goods movement issues are identified but are not resolved. Potential project impacts to GM are not discussed. Current & future systems are identified, but and project is not consistent. Incomplete connectivity with current and planned facilities. Not consistent with system linkages. Does not identify all transportations system within project area. Does not consider all systems (state, regional, corridor) when evaluation project impacts. Goods movement issue are not identified or considered as part of the project analysis. Negatively impacts goods movement. No consideration of system linkages. Negatively impacts current and/or future system(s) Negatively impacts travel modes. Cannot meet ADA requirements. Does not identify transportation systems within in project area. Does not identify or address ITS strategies or components. Does not consider system performance when evaluating project impacts.

Planning Designed to Operate as Planned (Page 4 of 4) Corridor Preservation & Management of Transportation Facilities and Services Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) 5 4 3 2 1 State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Identifies Statewide and Regional Intelligent Transportation Architecture and provides a discussion of how ITS strategies will be fully implemented through the project. Consistent with and supports future transportation and land use developments plans. Enhances and preserves economic grow. Full consensus between all stakeholders (public, region, city, CT, etc...) on design. Design creates community identity. Design preserves and enhances the community and environment without impeding mobility and safety. All community plans identified with a detailed discussion of how project fit in. Identifies ITS strategies or components with solid project link. Compatible with future transportation and land use development plans. Enhances and preserves economic grow. Design meets the needs of the community and environment without impeding mobility and safety. Project improves community identity. Project addresses all stakeholder and public concerns. All community plans identified with a discussion of how project fit in. Compatible with current and future transportation and land use development plans. Identifies ITS strategies with minimal linkage to project. Project is sensitive to the community and most critical needs are integrated into the design. Community needs are identified but not addressed within the project design Community plans identified with minimal discussion of how project addresses. Not compatible with current transportation and land use development plans. Identifies ITS strategies or components without linking to project. Community needs are identified but not addressed within the project design. Community plans identified but project is not consistent. Does not consider future transportation development plans. Community needs are not considered. Page 51

Evaluation Criteria Index Page 52

Design Need and Purpose Need (symptoms) and Deficiency (what is broken) clearly and succinctly stated Purpose statement identifies deficiency and defines intended outcome project will address and is achievable. Alternatives or proposed design meet the expectations stated in the Need and Purpose? Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Chapter 9 of PDPM page 9-23 Chapter 10 of PDPM page 10-13 Identifying Project Alternatives and Mitigation of Impacts - Clear Project/ Neutral Statement Definition and Background Information - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/definition_background.htm Purpose and Need - Why, Who, When, What, How - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/4wh.htm Chapter 9 of PDPM page 9-23 Chapter 10 of PDPM page 10-13 Identifying Project Alternatives and Mitigation of Impacts - Clear Project/ Neutral Statement Definition and Background Information - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/definition_background.htm Purpose and Need - Why, Who, When, What, How - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/4wh.htm Chapter 8 page 8-40 - For Discussion of Alternative and reason given for Selection of the Preferred Alternative. Chapter 9 of PDPM page 9-23 Chapter 10 of PDPM page 10-13 Identifying Project Alternatives and Mitigation of Impacts Definition and Background Information - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/definition_background.htm Purpose and Need - Why, Who, When, What, How - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/4wh.htm Supporting Evidence Chapter 9 of PDPM page 9-23 Definition and Background Information - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/definition_background.htm Purpose and Need - Why, Who, When, What, How - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/4wh.htm Design Standards Compliance Highway Design Manual (HDM) Geometric Index 103 for Design Period Index 105 for Pedestrian Facilities Index 201 for Sight Distance Standards Index 202 for Superelevation Standards Index 203 for Horizontal Alignment Standards Index 204 for Grades Standards Index 205 Road Connections and Driveways Index 206 for Pavement Transitions Standards Index 301 for Travel way Standards Index 302 for Shoulder Standards Index 303 for Curbs, Dikes, and Side Gutters Index 304 for Side Sideslopes Standards Page 53

Design DIB AASHTO - Local facilities PDPM requirements for product. PDPM requirements for product. Optimization HDM 81Design Philosophy Reasonable Accommodates all users Accommodate future of facility (beyond design life) Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Index 305 for Median Standards Index 306 for Right of Way Index 307 for 2-Lane and Local Road Crossing Index 309 for Clearance Standards Index 310 for Frontage Roads Index 403 for Angle of Intersection, Index 404 for Design Vehicles Index 405 for intersection Design Index 406 for Intersection traffic volumes Index 501 for Interchange Spacing Index 504 for Interchange Standards Index 613.5 for Shoulder Pavement Standards Index 635.5 for overlay limits Index 833 for 3 or more Lane and Cross Slope ASSHTO Roadside Design Guide for roadside Channel/ditch guidance 79-3R and 2R 80 Roundabouts 81 CAPM 82 - ADA AASHTO Green Book PSR & PSR-PDS - Chapter 9 & Appendix L of PDPM DPR, PR - Chapter 12 & Appendix K of PDPM PSSR, etc. - Chapter 12 & Appendix G of PDPM PSR for new IC - Chapter 27 PSR for Relinquishments Chapter 25 VA compliance - chapter 19 HDM index 81 - Consult with Maintenance, Right of Way, Environmental and Operations, evaluations. DP-22 Context Sensitive Solutions DP-05 Multimodal Alternatives Analysis DD-64 Complete Streets - Integrating the Transportation System HDM index 81.1 Philosophy & 81.6 Design Standards and Highway Context HDM index 204.4 Consider All Users Project Compatible with plan for route or not prohibit route evolution to Freeway/ Expressway? CALIFORNIA CODES STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE SECTION 250-257 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=shc&group=00001-01000&file=250-257 Page 54

Design Compatibility/Consistency with adjacent facility Driver Expectation/ standard practice Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Caltrans Goals - STEWARDSHIP - Preserve and enhance California's resources and assets A new structure will last 75 to 100 years, It needs to be built such that it does not prohibit future growth of the system beyond 20 years design period. Waste of resources to remove a high capital expenditure is at 50% its life. We know if we put in a tight diamond IC where there is little development, when traffic has developed to the point were more IC is needed, thing will be developed to the point a Parcel clover leaf or other can't be used (too much impact). Is project choosing a cheaper alternative, rather what will be best in the future? HDM 203.3 Horizontal Alignment Consistency HDM 203.3 Horizontal and Vertical Alignment Consistency HDM 204.6 Coordination of Horizontal and Vertical Alignment If project changing the "type" for facility, does it provide a transition area. Change such: as 2-conv to 4-exp, high speed 2-con to urban complete street, Freeway to conventional. Appendix K-Project Report Template- PDPM Freeway-Freeway connector first connector takes to Right on the facility and the second takes you left. Does the decisions/moves that traveling public are required to make: make since, follow a known pattern, logical, etc HDM 203.3 Horizontal Alignment Consistency HDM 203.3 Horizontal and Vertical Alignment Consistency HDM 204.6 Coordination of Horizontal and Vertical Alignment Appendix K-Project Report Template- PDPM Page 55

Project Management Cost Management Support Cost Estimate Support Cost Component Estimate Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Deputy Directive (DD)-23-R1, DD-34-R1/DD 93 Project Management Directive (PMD) 014, 018, and 019, and Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM) Chapters 9, 12, 13, 16 DD-23-R1, DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 014, 018, and 019 and PDPM Chapters 9, 12, 13, 16 IQA Support Cost Estimate DD-23-R1,DD-34-R1 DD-90, PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16 Programmed Support Cost Forecast Support Cost Estimate at Completion Support Cost Performance Index (CPI) -- Earned Value Construction Capital Cost Estimate Right of Way Capital Estimate Environmental Capital Estimate Programmed Construction Capital Programmed Right of Way Capital Construction Capital Forecast Cost Estimate at Completion Right of Way Capital Forecast Cost Estimate at Completion Schedule Management Workplan Schedule (Planning) Programmed Schedule Forecast Schedule and Progress Schedule Performance Index (SPI) -- Earned Value DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 014, 018, and 019 and PDPM Chapters 9, 12, 13, 16 DD-23-R1, DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 014, 018, and 019, and PDPM Chapters 9, 12, 13, 16 If Earned Value Calculation available. (Applicable if Earned Value Calculation available). PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16, and 20 and PMD 014, 018, and 019 PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16, and 20 and PMD 014, 018, and 019 PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16, and 20 and PMD 014, 018, and 019 PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16, and 20 and PMD 014, 018, and 019 PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16, and 20 and PMD 014, 018, and 019 PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16, and 20 and PMD 014, 018, and 019 PDPM Chapter 9, 12, 13, 16, and 20 and PMD 014, 018, and 019 DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 004R/PMD/018/PMD019 DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 004R/PMD/018/PMD019 DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 004R/PMD/018/PMD019 If Earned Value Calculation available. Applicable if Earned Value Calculation available. Page 56

Project Management Optimization Approved Scope of Work Cooperative Agreement Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 014, 018, and 019 and PDPM Chapters 9, 12, 13, 16 DD-34-R1/DD 93 PMD 014, 018, and 019 and PDPM Chapters 9, 12, 13, 16 Programmed Scope PDPM Chapter 9 & 12 and PMC 018/PMD 019 Independent Quality Assurance for Scope (For projects performed by Local Agency -- Not Applicable if work is performed by Caltrans) DD-23-R1and PDPM Chapters 9, 12, 13, and 16 and PMD 004R. Programmed Schedule PDPM Chapter 9 & 12 Oversight DD-90 and DD-23, PDPM 16 Page 57

Structure Design Design Standards Compliance Reports/Approvals/ Recommendations Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Signatures Bridge Design Details (BDD) 1-12 Foundation Reports Memo To Designer (MTD) 1-35, MTD Sec3, MTD Sec 4, Bridge Design Aids (BDA) 15-3 to 15-6, MTD 5-20 Hydraulic Reports MTD1-46 Retrofit Evaluation Report (widening) Documents/Specifications/ Standards AASHTO LRFD and CA Amendments CA Seismic Design Criteria Bridge Memo To Designers AASHTO LRFD and CA Amendment, SDC- Seismic Design Criteria, Xs Sheets, MTD, BDD, BDA, BDD 1-16, Standard Plans and Standard Specifications Structural System Structure Type BDA-Section 6,7 and 10, MTD 1-29, MTD 21-35 Foundation Type MTD3-1, MTD 4-1, BDA Sec2&12(piles),15-2,15-3, BDD sec5 Structural element capacity BDA Sec 13(columns), MTD Sec6, MTD Sec10 Skew BDA, 5-31, Sec.5 Prestressing/Post-tensioning MTD Sec11, BDA-Sec6, BDD Sec14 and BDD Sec9 Camber BDD 9-20, MTD 12-3(steel) Hinges BDA 14-1, MTD 11-34, MTD Profile Grade, Super Elevations, BDD 4-1 Contours Retrofit BDA 14-2 to 14-5 Widening MTD 20-12, MTD Sec 9 Seismic Specific Considerations( MTD Sec 20 Relative Column size, seat widths, ductile members) Earth Retaining Systems MTD Sec 5 Detailing Standards Sheet Layout and order MTD 1-47, BDD, MTD 20-5, BDD Sec1 Reinforcement Details MTD Sec10, BDA 5-89, BDD sec13, BDD Sec10 Dimension Style & Consistency BDD1-4 Seismic Specific Elements MTD 20-9 (Ultimate and Service splice, Plastic Hinge location) Existing structures (Widening, etc.) BDA 5-81, MTD Sec 7, MTD 8-5 Pay Limits Identified BDA sec11 Staging Sequences MTD 8-6, MTD 8-7, MTD 14-19, MTD 20-2, MTD Sec21 Clearances Horizontal Bridge Design Practice (BDP) Pg10-3& Fig 10.3 Vertical BDA Chp10, Fig 10-2&10-3 Page 58

Structure Design Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Falsework BDA, Chp10, table 10-2 Railroad BDA 10-4, MTD 17-105 and MTD 17-115 and Railroad Guidelines, BDD 12 Optimization Consistency w/specs BDA 11, Standard Plans, Standard Specifications Order of work Work items Consistency w/road Plans Risk Identified Existing Structures MTD, BDA and Standard Plans Existing utilities Hazardous materials Page 59

Right of Way Right of Way Minimization & Compliance R/W Defined Scope (sufficient lead time, scope reflected in the data sheet) Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Right of Way Manual - Chapter 4, Ready To List Guide - Use of Mitigation Compliance Cost Estimate (MCCE) Form. R/W Defined Scope (sufficient lead time, scope reflected in the data sheet) PDPM - Chapter 9 Article 4 Chapter 10 Section 4, Chapter 29 2,Chapter 2 Article 2; Right of Way Manual - Chapters 3 & 4; Ready To List Guide - 1.3.2, Layout Sheets/Plan Sheets/Mapping (mostly applicable in PS&E) Plan Preparation Manual Chapter 2 2-2.13 - Utility Facilities, Chapter 4 4.2- Cost Estimate Mapping, 4.2.2 Map requirements Mitigation PDPM Chapter 2 Article 2, Chapter 9 Article 4, Chapter 10 4, Chapter 29 2, Right of Way Manual - Chapters 3 & 4; Ready To List Guide - 1.3.2, Utilities Project Development Procedures- Appendix LL; Right of Way Manual- Chapter 13; Plan Preparation Manual 2 Page 60

Environmental Page 61 Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Purpose and Need Key Reference Materials Link(s) Capacity, Various standards. TCR would contain Concept Congestion, LOS. Safety Index. Project specific traffic studies. STRAIN to identify bridge needs. Transportation, Demand, & Safety Roadway Deficiencies Social Demands or Economical Development Legislation Modal Interrelationship and System Linkages Air Quality Improvements Pavement Indices: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/pdf/chp0610.pdf Project specific. Should follow guidelines for design exceptions where applicable: PDPM Chapter 21 http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pdpm/chap_pdf/chapt 21.pdf Varies per project. May be within a general plan or other planning document. Varies per project. Depends on specific legislation guiding a project. This and many of the items on the list come straight out of the technical advisory from FHWA: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol1/sec1/ch1fedlaw/ta66 40.txt 1) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/is_ea_ao.docx 2) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 3) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 4) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 5) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_eis_ao.docx 1) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/is_ea_ao.docx 2) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 3) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_eis.docx, 4) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_ea_ao.docx, and 5) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_eis_ao.docx 1) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/is_ea_ao.docx 2) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 3) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_eis.docx, 4) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_ea_ao.docx, and 5) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_eis_ao.docx 1) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/is_ea_ao.docx 2) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 3) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_eis.docx, 4) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_ea_ao.docx, and 5) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_eis_ao.docx 1) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/is_ea_ao.docx 2) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 3) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_eis.docx, 4) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_ea_ao.docx, and 5) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_eis_ao.docx 1) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/is_ea_ao.docx 2) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_ea_ao.docx, 3) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/eir_eis.docx, 4) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/

Environmental Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) templates/ao/nepa_ea_ao.docx, and 5) http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ templates/ao/nepa_eis_ao.docx Independent 1) 23 CFR 771.111 [f], 2) http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ guidebook/vol2/doc12a.pdf Utility Logical Termini 1) 23 CFR 771.111 [f], 2) http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ guidebook/vol2/doc12a.pdf The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations outline three general principles at 23 CFR 771.111(f) that are to be used to frame a highway project: In order to ensure meaningful evaluation of alternatives and to avoid commitments to transportation improvements before they are fully evaluated, the action evaluated in each environmental impact statement (EIS) or finding of no significant impact (FONSI) shall: 1. Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address environmental matters on a broad scope; 2. Have independent utility or independent significance, i.e., be usable and be a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements in the area are made; and 3. Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation improvements. http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol1/sec1/c h1fedlaw/termini.pdf "Under Section 6005, EAs have been divided into two categories: complex EAs and routine EAs. Complex EAs are defined as those EAs that have complex issues or impacts in that they may include multiple location alternatives, debate related to purpose and need, strong public controversy, issues related to logical termini or independent utility," http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol1/sec4/c h31ea/chap31ea.htm Also, PDPM page 8-23, logical limits of the project are a key function of the PDT team. Page 62

Environmental Purpose and Need Statement Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) The Council on Environmental Quality s (CEQ) regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) mandates that Chapter 1 of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental Assessment (EA) discuss the purpose of and need for action (CEQ Regulations, Section 1502.13). The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project, including the underlying purpose of the project (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15124(b)). http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/purpose_need.ht m http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/design/dd-83.pdf http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pdpm/chap_pdf/chapt 08.pdf 1) http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/guide book/gjoint.asp 2 http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/downloads/ general/pn_report.pdf,3) http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ projdev/tdmneed.asp,4) http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projd ev/impta6640.asp, 5) http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pdpm/ chap_pdf/chapt10.pdf, 6) http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ guidebook/ginterim.asp, 7) http://www.dot.gov/execorder/13274/ workgroups/purposeneed.htm, 8) Environmental Commitments, Minimization, & Compliance Environmental PDPM Chapter 12 Impacts: Level of Impact (Based on Review both Design Product and Environmental Document) Environmental Impacts: Displayed in Design Document PDPM Chapter 12 Contents of Project Reports/Consistency with Environmental Document: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/p dpm/chap_pdf/ch12.pdf Contents of Project Reports/Consistency with Environmental Document: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/p dpm/chap_pdf/ch12.pdf Scope Consistency PDPM Chapter 12 Contents of Project Reports/Consistency with Environmental Document: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/p dpm/chap_pdf/ch12.pdf Page 63

Environmental Air Quality Conformity Purpose & Need Consistency Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) PDMPM Chapter 11 PDPM Chapter 10 PDPM Chapter 1 Air Analysis: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol1/s ec3/physical/ch11air/chap11.htm PDPM (page 10-11) on Conformity http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/p dpm/chap_pdf/chapt10.pdf PDPM (page 1-32, 1-33) Conformity and RTPs http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/p dpm/chap_pdf/chapt01.pdf See Purpose and Need guidance above. Page 64

Office Engineer Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Construction Contract Standards Compliance Office Engineer Plans Standards Compliant Specifications Standard Compliant CADD Manual Plan Preparation Manual Standard Plans (NSP) Specification Style Guide Guide to Standard Specifications Ready To List (RTL) Guide Estimate Standards Compliant PLACs compliance System Process Requirements BEEs requirements RTL Guide RTL Guide RTL Guide Page 65

Construction Protective Features Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Construction Access Standard Specifications (SS) Section 12 Temporary Traffic Control TMP Elements SS 12 Temporary Traffic Control Traffic Handling Plan SS 12-4 Maintaining Traffic Staging SS 8 Prosecution and Progress Ability to Meet OSHA SS 7-1.02K(6) OSHA Standards Requirements Lead compliance plan SS 7-1.02K(6)(j) Confined Space Safety Confined places SS 7-1.02K(6)(d) Confined Space Safety Hazardous materials SS 13 Water Pollution Control Air quality SS 14-9.01, 18-1.01, AIR QUALITY High Risk Facilities/Utilities SS 5-1.36D Non-highway Facilities Trenching & Shoring SS 1.02K(6) OSHA, SS 15 Existing Facilities, Earthwork, 48 Temporary Structures, Trenching and Shoring Manual Falsework SS 7-1.04 Public Safety, 12 Temporary Traffic Control, 48-2 Falsework Detour Safety SS 7 Legal Relations and Responsibility to the Public, 12 Temporary Traffic Control, SS 15 Existing Facilities, Minimize Night Work SS 7 Legal Relations and Responsibility to the Public, 12 Temporary Traffic Control, Construction methods SS 9 Payment, SS 83-2.02D(3) Construction Methods Construction Contract Standard Compliance R/W Access SS 7-1.03 Public Convenience, 7-1.04 Public Safety Permits Available/In Contract SS 5-1.020B Permits, Licenses, Agreements, and Certifications, SS 14 Environmental Stewardship Non-conflicting Permit Windows SS 5 Control of Work, SS 8 Prosecution and Progress, SS 13 Water Pollution Control, 14 Environmental Stewardship Subsurface Information Complete Adequate Work Windows Available Materials Sources Complete Materials Information Package SS 2 2-1.30 Job Site And Document Examination, 8 Prosecution and Progress, 49 Piling, 68 Subsurface Drains, 1 General, 86b Electrical Systems 8 Prosecution and Progress SS 2 Bidding, 4 Scope of Work, 5 Control of Work, 6 Control of Materials, 7 Legal Relations and Responsibility to the Public SS 6 Control of Materials Page 66

Construction Staging Design Complete Working Days Accurate Accurate Pay Clause and Quantities Liquidated Damages, Incentives, Lane Rental Reasonable Constructible Subsurface Work Strategy Aerial Clearances Material Handling & Staging Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) SS 8 Prosecution and Progress SS 5 Control of Work, 8 Prosecution and Progress, 9 Payment SS 1 General, 2 Bidding, 9 Payment, SS 8-1.10 Liquidated Damages, 9 Payment, 7 Prosecution and Progress SS 2 2-1.30 Job Site And Document Examination, 8 Prosecution and Progress, 49 Piling, 68 Subsurface Drains, 1 General, 86b Electrical Systems 12 Temporary Traffic Control, SS 15 Existing Facilities, Temporary Structures SS 2 Bidding, 4 Scope of Work, 5 Control of Work, 6 Control of Materials, 7 Legal Relations and Responsibility to the Public Traffic Control & Handling SS 12 Temporary Traffic Control Criteria Permit Restrictions SS 5-1.020B Permits, Licenses, Agreements, and Certifications, SS 14 Environmental Stewardship Working Day/Schedule SS 5 Control of Work, 8 Prosecution and Progress, 9 Payment Analysis Utility Relocated SS 5-1.36D Non-highway Facilities R/W Construction Easements SS 7-1.03 Public Convenience, 7-1.04 Public Safety Fabrication/Submittal Lead Time SS 11 Quality Control and Assurance, 24 through 95 with subsection on Submittals. Page 67

Structure Construction Constructible Subsurface Work Strategy Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Foundation Manual (Chapter 1 Foundation Investigation, Chapter 2 Type Selection, Chapter 3 Contract Administration), Foundation Report, Geotech report, Standard spec(sec. 19-3 earthwork, Sec. 46 Ground Anchors and soil Nails 46-2.03 Construction, Sec. 49 Piling, Sec 51 Concrete Structure), Standard plans(sec B2-3,5,8,9,10 and 11), Trenching and Shoring Manual, Bridge Construction Record and Procedure,(BCRAP) (sec.130, Foundation) Traffic Control/Handling Criteria Traffic control manual, Construction Manual (Sec 2. Safety and Traffic), Standard Plan(Temporary Traffic Control Systems T10 ~ T17), BCRAP 2-11.0-1, Notice of Impaired Clearance Permit Restrictions Construction Manuals, RE's pending file, BCRAP 2-10.0 Utility Conflicts Construction Operation laydown area Stage construction Traffic handling, Memo to Designers, MTD 1-11, MTD 9, MTD Sec 14, Bridge Design Aid, BDA 10-3 ~ 10-8. Structure Type Materials/Fabrication Structure/Roadway compatibility Bridge Specs and Details Removal operations Bridge Design Aids Section 10,Bridge Design Specifications, MTD, Section1-29 Special Provisions, AWS codes, Standard specs and plans, AISD manuals, Steel manuals, concrete manuals, Building Construction manual, Construction Manual Chapter 4-49 Piling, 4-50 Prestressed Concrete, 4-51 Concrete Structure, 4-52 Reinforcement, 4-53 Shortcrete, 4-55 Steel Structure Highway Design Manual, Plan Preparation Manual, Ready to List Guide Standard Spec(Div I ~ III, VI,VIII, X, XI) and Standard Plans(Excavation & Backfill, Box Culvert, Bridge Details, Piles, Retaining Walls, T-beam Details, Joint Seals, Deck Drains, Utility Opening, CIP P/S Girder, Bridge Concrete Barriers, Bridge Metal Rail Barriers, Structural Steel Plate Vehicular Undercrossing, Communication and sprinkler control Conduits(bridge), Water Supply Line(bridge), Sound Walls, Overhead Signs(truss), Overhead Signs(tubular), Overhead Sign(lightweight)), Bridge Standard Detail Sheet April 2000. Standard Special Provision(Bridge Removal), BCRAP manuals(124 Demolition) Page 68

Traffic Operations Protective Features Clearances Sight Distance Historical Analysis Traffic Control / Handling Criteria Safety Features Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) HDM, Ramp Meter Design Manual, Standard Plans HDM TASAS, Traffic Manual MUTCD, CVC, Traffic Manual, Standard Plans Traffic Manual, MUTCD, CVC, Traffic Operations Policy Directives Design Standard compliance MUTCD Signing MUTCD Markings Temporary Traffic Control (Staging Plans only) Electrical Design MUTCD, CVC MUTCD, CVC MUTCD, CVC, Traffic Manual, Standard Plans Traffic Manual, Signal, Lighting & Electrical Systems Design Guide Designed to Operate as Planned Operational Studies CVC, Highway Capacity Manual, Traffic Bulletins, Ramp Meter Design Manual, Managed Lane Design TOPD 11-02, HOV guidelines, Standard Plans Bike/Ped Expectations (revised) TMP Elements ITS Elements Local bike/ped plan, MUTCD, Complete Intersections, Complete Streets Implementation Action Plan, Pedestrian and Bicycle facilities in California Transportation Management Plan Guidelines Traffic Manual, HOV Guidelines, Managed Lane Design TOPD 11-02, Ramp Meter Design Manual Page 69

Maintenance Protective Features Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Maintenance Road Access HDM CP 100, Sec. 107.2 (Maintenance, Police); MVP Roadside Feature Access HDM CP 700, Sec. 701.2 (Fences), CP 900, Sec. 902.1 (Maintenance Rd. Access);304.1 Sideslopes; 304.2 catch point to R/W; 1) Vegetation Control - Reduce Recurring Maintenance Memorandum, January 2, 2007? 2) New Design for Safety Practices - Roadside Paving (Alleviate Maintenance Concerns), September 30, 1998? 3) Cal OSHA Rules and Regulation OSHA Requirements (needs description) Bridge Access Worker Exposure Maintainable Corridor Consistency Roadside Features Confined Space Regulation Requirement T8 CCR, Article 108, Sec. 5156-5158 1) Occupational Safety & Health Act (Means of Egress, Protection on the job) 1) ABME Structure Maintenance Procedures Manual 2) Bridge Inspector's Reference Manual 3) Memo to Designers 12-7, Catwalks on Steel Bridges, August 2004 HDM CP 200. Sec. 210.6 (Hand Rail), Chapter 8, "Protection of Workers" of the Maintenance Manual Workers", of the Maintenance Manual 1) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter 7 - Traffic Control, Safety and Convenience of Traffic 2) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter 8 Protection of Workers 3) Code of Safe Operation Practices 4) Division of Human Resources, Safety Manual 5) Safety Bulletin - Electrical Safety - Part 1 and 2 6) Safety Bulletin - Guardrail Protection, January 200 1) Deputy Directive, DD-31, Protection of Scenic Corridors, December 15, 1994 HDM CP 800, Sec. 823.2 (drainage pipe slopes) 1) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter C5 - Drainage Facilities, Fences, and Roadside Appurtenances 2) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter D1 - Litter, Debris, and Graffiti 3) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter F - Maintenance Storm Water Management Program 4) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter G - Public Facilities Page 70

Maintenance Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Landscape Features HDM CP 900 Sec. 902.1 (HWY Planting Std, Guide), 902.3 (Planting Guidelines) 902.4 (Irrigation. Guidelines) 1) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter C2 - Vegetation Control 2) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter E - Landscaping 3) Deputy Directive, DD 03/04-02, Vegetation Control, October 5, 1992 Pavement Strategy HDM CP 600, Sec. 618.1 1) Maintenance Technical Advisory Guide (MTAG) 2) Pavement Condition Survey Manual 3) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter A - Flexible Pavement Electrical Access HDM CP 700, Sec. 706.1 (Roadside Management) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter K - Electrical Mechanical Access Access for Pumping Plant HDM CP 800, Sec. 839.5 1) Safety Bulletin - Definition of a Confined Space, October 2001 Bridge & Structure Access CP 800, Sec. 822.1 (Drainage Access) 1) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter H - Bridges 2) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter J1 - Tunnels, Tubes, Ferries, and Pumping Plants 3) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter J2 - Drawbridge, Tunnel, Tube, and Ferry Operations 4) ABME Structure Maintenance Procedures Manual 5) Memo to Designers 18-3 Supply Lines, Communication and Sprinkler Control Conduit on Bridges, Dec 1990 6) Memo to Designers 7-10 Bridge Deck Joint Rehabilitation Projects, September 1994 Inventory Resources IMMS 1) IMMS (database system) 2) Maintenance Manual Volume I, Chapter 10 - Maintenance Management 3) Division of Transportation Systems Information - Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) 4) Division of Transportation Systems Information - Highway System Engineering Data (HSEB) Page 71

Planning Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Designed to Operate as Planned Statewide Plan Consistency 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 771.105(b), 420, 450.200, 450.206 (a 1-8), 450.214 & 450.216 (k); American Disability Act (ADA) of 1990; CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act & SB 391 California Transportation Plan; DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12), Ch. 9 pages (11-16); Tools: California Transportation Plan (CTP), California Rail Plan, Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan (ITSP), California Aviation System Plan, Goods Movement Action Plan (GMAP), California Strategic Highway Safety Plan, the State Transit Plan, District System Management Plans (DSMPs), Transportation System Development Programs (TSDPs), Corridor System Management Plans (CSMPs), Transportation Concept Reports (TCRs), Transportation Management System (TMS) Master Plans, Interim Guidance on Incorporating Sea Level Rise, Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs), and California Interregional Blueprint (CIB). System Planning Consistency 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 420, 450.200, 450.206 (a 1-8), 450.214 & 450.216 (k) & 40 CFR Parts 1500 et seq.; CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-60-R1 Transportation Management Plans, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; Page 72

Planning Regional Planning Consistency Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-26, 28-30); Tools: CSMPs, TCRs, DSMP, TSDP, Purpose and Need - Why, Who, When, What, How - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/4wh.htm, and the MPR. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 771.105(b), 420, 450.200, 450.206 (a 1-8), 450.214 & 450.216 (k), & 450 & 40 CFR Parts 1500 et seq.; AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act & SB 375 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008; CA Gov Code Section 65080, 65086 (Planning); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP- 10 Department Commitments, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 28-30); Tools: RTPs, General Plans & Zoning Plans, Community Plans, Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Congestion Management Plan (CMPs), Regional Blueprint Plans, and Sustainable Community Strategies (SCS). Air Quality 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 42 USC 7506((c)) Clean Air Act; 40 CFR 93.216, 93.127, 93.218 & 23 CFR 450.200, 450.206 (a)(5), 450.208 (b); Clean Air Act of 1990 and subsequent amendments; AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act, SB 375 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, & SB 391 California Transportation Plan; DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees; DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP- 26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 40-41), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 30); Tools: Climate Action Plans, Air Quality Conformity, Climate Change, RTPs, CMPs, SCS, and Regional Blueprint Plans. Page 73

Planning Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Multimodal 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 450.200, 450.208 (a1-8) & (g), 450.214; Sections 1502.13 & 1502.14; CEQA 15124(b); 28 CFR 35.102 (ADA); CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 146.5 (Park & Ride); CA Vehicle Code (CVC) Sections 21200-21212, 21960 (Bikes); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-60-R1 Transportation Management Plans, DD- 64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need,DD-98 Integrating Bus Rapid Transit into State Facilities; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP 27, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems, DP-27 Bus Rapid Transit Implementation Support; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 26-30, 40-41, 48-49, 54-59), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-30); Tools: RTPs, Long and Short Range Transit Plans, Rail Plans, DSMPs, TSDPs, TCRs, and CSMPs. Non-Motorized 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 450.200 & 450.208(a)(1-8); CEQ Sections 1502.13 & 1502.14; CEQA 15124(b); 28 CFR 35.102 (ADA);; CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 890-894.2 (Bikes); CVC Sections 21200-21212, 21960 (Bikes); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change; Goods Movement PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 48-49, 54-55, 57), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-30); Tools: District and regional bicycle plans, equestrian plans, trail plans, specific plans, pedestrian plans, RTPs, general plans, and community plans. 23 COF 450.206 (a)(4)(6); 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 771.105(b), 450.200, 450.208 (a)(1-8); CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); Page 74

Planning System Linkage and Policy Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 48-49), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-26, 28-30); Tools: State & regional freight studies, DSMP, TSDPs, TCRs, CSMPs, RTPs, GMAP, and RTPs. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 450.206 (a)(1-8); CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 230 to 635, 890-894.2 (Bikes), 146.5 (Park & Ride); CVC Sections 21655.6 (HOV), 21960 (Bikes); DD-31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD- 60-R1 Transportation Management Plans, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD- 83 Project Purpose and Need, DD-98 Integrating Bus Rapid Transit into State Facilities; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems, DP-27 Bus Rapid Transit Implementation Support; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 48-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-26, 28-30); System Performance Tools: State & regional freight studies, STAA, NHS, DSMP, TSDPs, TCRs, CSMPs, RTPs, GMAP, MPR, 2011 Ramp Metering Development Plan, HOV plans, TMS Master Plan, State Intelligent Transportation (ITS) Architecture, and Regional ITS Architectures. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 46 External Advisory Committees, DD-60-R1 Transportation Management Plans, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-26, 28-30); Page 75

Planning Corridor Preservation & Management of Transportation Facilities & Services Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Tools: MPR, TCRs, CSMPs, TMS Master Plan, State ITS Architecture and Regional ITS Architectures. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 146.5 (Park & Ride); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-60-R1 Transportation Management Plans, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems, DP-27 Bus Rapid Transit Implementation Support (BRT) PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 page (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-26, 28-30); Tools: MPR, TMS Master Plan, HOV plans, TCRs, and CSMPs. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 28 CFR 35.102; CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 146.5 (Park & Ride), 890-894.2 (Bikes); CVC Sections 21200-21212 (Bikes); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-22 Context Sensitive Solutions, DP-28 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Related Statutes; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 26-30, 40-41, 48-49, 54-55, 64-66), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 24-30), Ch. 22-Community Involvement, Ch. 10 pages (10-13); Tools: Project communication plan, project charter, community plans, TCRs, special studies, RTPs, and SCS. Purpose and Need Communication 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; / Information 23 CFR 450.212 ((a)1-5); CEQ Sections 1502.13 & 1502.14; Case law: North Buckhead Civic Association v. Skinner, 903 F. 2d 1533 (11th Cir. 1990); CEQA 15124(b); Page 76

Planning Stakeholders Needs & Public Engagement Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Caltrans Project Management Handbook, 10-2007 5th ed., Project Communication Handbook 9-2007 2nd ed., Project Charter; Guide to Capital Project Delivery Work plan Standards, 10-2009; DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD 46, DD-64- R1 Complete Streets, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-02-R2 Ethics, DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP- 14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-22 Context Sensitive Solutions ; Project Management Directive 001; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4) Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-24), Ch. 10 page (13); Tools: TCRs, CSMPs RTPs, MPR, and the 2003 Caltrans Purpose & Need Team Final Report & Recommendations. 23 USC 134, 135 & 42 USC 200d-1 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 771.105(b), 450.208 (a)(1-7), 450.218, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 & 40 CFR Parts 1500 et seq. & 49 CFR 21; 28 CFR 35.102; CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 146.5 (Park & Ride); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets,DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-02-R2 Ethics, DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-22 Context Sensitive Solutions, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems, DP-27 Bus Rapid Transit Implementation Support (BRT), DP-28 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Related Statutes; Project Management Directive 001; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 54-55), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-24, 26-28), Ch. 22- Community Involvement; Tools: Project Charter, Project Communication Plan, Regional Transportation Planners, Caltrans Transportation Planners, Special Interest Groups, Community Groups, State and Federal Agencies, TCRs, and RTPs. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 146.5 (Park & Ride), 890-894.2 (Bikes); CVC Sections 21200-21212 (Bikes); Page 77

Planning State Planning Consistency System Planning Consistency Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets,DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-4 Environmental Policy, DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-22 Context Sensitive Solutions, DP-28 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Related Statutes; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 26-30, 40-41, 48-49, 54-55, 64-66), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-28), Ch. 22-Community Involvement; Tools: Project Communication Plan, Project Charter, Community Plans, TCRs, Special Studies, RTPs, and SCS. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 450.200, 450.206 (a)(1-8), 450.208 (a)(1-7), 450.214, 450.216 (k),450.320, 450.328; CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act & SB 391 California Transportation Plan; DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-26, 28-30); Tools: CTP, California Rail Plan, ITSP, California Aviation System Plan, GMAP, California Strategic Highway Safety Plan, the State Transit Plan, DSMPs, TSDPs, CSMPs, TCRs, TMS, Interim Guidance on Incorporating Sea Level Rise, RTPs, and the CIB. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 450.200, 450.206 (a)(1-8), 450.208 (a)(1-7), 450.214, 450.216 (k), 405.218 (a) (b) (c), 40 CFR Parts 1500 et seq.; CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); DD-31 Protection of Scenic Corridors, DD 34 R1, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; Page 78

Planning Regional Planning Consistency Page 79 Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-30); Tools: CSMPs, TCRs, DSMP, TSDP, Purpose and Need - Why, Who, When, What, How - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/emo/4wh.htm, and the MPR. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 450.208 (a1-7), 450.214, 450.216 (k), 450.320, 450.328 & 40 CFR Parts 1500 et seq.; CA Gov Code Section 65080, 65086 (Planning); AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act & SB 375 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008; DD-34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP- 10 Department Commitments, DP-19 Working with Native American Communities, DP-21 Environmental Justice, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 48-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-30); Tools: RTPs, General plans & zoning plans, community plans, Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Congestion Management Plan (CMPs), Regional Blueprint Plans, and SCS. Multimodal 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; CA Gov Code Sections 4450 et seq. (ADA), 65086 (Planning); CA St & Hwy Code Sections 146.5 (Park & Ride), 890-894.2 (Bikes); CVC Sections 21200-21212, 21960 (Bikes); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need, DD-98 Integrating Bus Rapid Transit into State Facilities; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP- 11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-27 Bus Rapid Transit Implementation Support (BRT) PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 48-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-30); Tools: BRT Guide, State Transit Plan, State Rail Plan, TCRs/CSMPs, Short/Long Range Transit Plans, and RTPs. System Mobility 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR 771.105(b), 450.208 (a)(1-7), 771.111(f); CEQ Sections 1502.13 & 1502.14; CEQA 15124(b); CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD 98, DD-83

Planning Indexing (reference a policy, manual, standard, regulation, or practice as specific and reasonable) Project Purpose and Need, DD-98 Integrating Bus Rapid Transit into State Facilities; DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP- 11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems, DP- 27 Bus Rapid Transit Implementation Support (BRT); PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 4 pages (6-14), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-26, 28-30); Tools: MPR, TMS Master Plan, 2003 Caltrans Purpose & Need Team Final Report & Recommendations, TCRs, CSMPs, and HOV plans. CT Functions 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-62-R1 The Ten-Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Plan, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-22 Context Sensitive Solutions, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; Project Management Directive 001; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41), Ch. 9 pages (22-24); Tools: Project communication plan, project charter, and 2003 Caltrans Purpose & Project Goals and Objective Need Team Final Report & Recommendations. 23 USC 134, 135 & 49 USC 5303, 5304; 23 CFR. 771.105(b) & 40 CFR Parts 1500 et seq. CEQ Section 1502.13 & 1502.14; CEQA Section 15124(b); CA Gov Code Section 65086 (Planning); DD-23-R1 Roles & Responsibilities for Development of Projects on the SHS, DD- 34-R1 Program and Project Management for Capital Outlay Projects, DD-46 External Advisory Committees, DD-64-R1 Complete Streets, DD-83 Project Purpose and Need; DP-02-R2 Ethics, DP-04 Environmental Policy, DP-05 Multimodal Analysis, DP-06 Caltrans Partnerships, DP-07 Project Delivery, DP-08 Freeway System Management, DP-09 New Technology Implementation, DP-10 Department Commitments, DP-11 Caltrans Workforce, DP-14 Quality in Caltrans, DP-23-R1 Energy Efficiency, Conservation, and Climate Change, DP-26 Intelligent Transportation Systems; PDPM Ch. 1 pages (20-39), Ch. 3 pages (3-4), Ch. 8 pages (5-6, 10-12, 23-30, 40-41, 46-49, 55-69), Ch. 9 pages (11-16, 22-30); Tools: MPR, the 2003 Caltrans Purpose & Need Team Final Report & Recommendations, DSMP, TSDP, TCRs, CSMPs, and RTPs. Page 80

Page 81