Bidder Inquiries
Caltrans Bidding Connect Account:
Sign In (Sign in is required to access Project Plans)
Create Account (Click here to create a Caltrans Bidding Connect Account)
Viewing inquiries for 03-0J8704
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: According to Section 5-1.36C(3), Utility Relocation and Department-Arranged Time for the Relocation table show it would take 126 working days for PG&E to relocate their utilities from STA 312+00 to STA 338+00, and 75 working days for AT&T to relocate their utilities from STA 312+00 to STA 338+00 during construction, that leave us only 34 working days to complete the whole project based on 160 working days max. Is Caltrans intent to have 160 working days max for Contractor to complete their work and another 126 working days for PG&E and AT&T to relocate their utilities , total of 286 working days to complete the whole project ? Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 09/27/2022
Response #1:(BI#1)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/27/2022
Response #2:(BI#1)-Caltrans intent is that once Stage 2 work is complete and Stage 3 work is not accessible, due to PG&E/AT&T relocation timelines, a temporary suspension of work (per Section 8-1.06 of the Standard Specifications) would be granted to stop working day expiration. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Inquiry #2: The Geotech report states everything is globally stable and the main concern is surface erosion after the cutting process because it won’t have vegetation immediately and the soil will lose some of its cohesion as it is exposed. We would like to submit ARMORMAX 75 as an alternative to the weaker TRM and wire mesh facing. ARMORMAX uses the specified B1 anchors, but is an HPTRM. No need for wire mesh. CALTRANS has used ARMORMAX and our engineers can provide a full analysis upon request. In addition, other CALTRANS engineers have used ARMORMAX in their districts and we can provide contacts for reference. ARMORMAX would reduce overall cost while improving performance.
Inquiry submitted 10/04/2022
Response #1:(BI#2)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/04/2022
Response #2:(BI#2)-I had called for a fastener “ultimate assembly strength†of 1100#. According to the manufacturer’s literature, B1 anchors have a working strength of 500#. Though that’s a different strength metric I believe it is much less. I’m also not convinced that the Armormax HPTRM without wire mesh would be as strong as one with wire mesh, especially considering the possibility of rockfall. I’ve inspected these RECP before and they are very flexible and could not withstand slipouts or rockfall. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Response #3:(BI#2)-The current documents call for a fastener “ultimate assembly strength†of 1100#. According to the manufacturer’s literature, B1 anchors have a working strength of 500#. Also, the Armormax HPTRM without wire mesh wouldn't be as strong as one with wire mesh, especially considering the possibility of rockfall. The RECP are very flexible and could not withstand slipouts or rockfall. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/12/2022
Inquiry #3: Does Caltrans have a designated disposal site for all of the excess excavation material?
Inquiry submitted 10/05/2022
Response #1:(BI#3)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/05/2022
Response #2:(BI#3)-No specified designated disposal site for this project. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Inquiry #4: It looks like there is plenty of room from stations 338+00-388+00 to add material into the shoulders or even raise the roadway if necessary. This would be much more feasible than off hauling over half of the roadway excavation item.
Inquiry submitted 10/05/2022
Response #1:(BI#4)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/05/2022
Response #2:(BI#4)-Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Inquiry #5: As per request #2 ARMORMAX HPTRM with B1 anchors should be considered as an alternative to the TRM and wire mesh because ARMORMAX HPTRM features non-halogen fire retardant technology (FR). ARMORMAX HPTRM is self-extinguishing, no flame spread and Zero burn rate. The current TRM spec is flammable.
Inquiry submitted 10/05/2022
Response #1:(BI#5)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/06/2022
Response #2:(BI#5)-Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Inquiry #6: On sheet Q-3, Rail Element Wall table, the quantities for wall #5 appear to be incorrect. This includes the Length, number of soldier piles, Concrete Backfill, Rail Elements. Please confirm the quantities for this bid item.
Inquiry submitted 10/06/2022
Response #1:(BI#6)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/06/2022
Response #2:(BI#6)-An addendum will be issued to address this inquiry.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Response #3:(BI#6)-Refer to addendum #2, dated 10-17-22.
Response posted 10/19/2022
Inquiry #7: Bid Item #0041 Rolled Erosion Control Product (TRM) is called out on plan ECL-1 Erosion Control Type 3 Step 3 Rolled Erosion Control Product (TRM) calls out wire mesh for the material but then it calls Type C which is typically Caltrans Approved Western Green's PP5-10. Can you please claify if it is the wire mesh or the PP5-10 or both?
Inquiry submitted 10/06/2022
Response #1:(BI#7)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/06/2022
Response #2:(BI#7)-As long as the TRM meets the Type C specification under 21-2.02O(5), there is no preference on product. However, the wire mesh reinforcement is called-out as an additional strength component due to the possibility of rockfall and should be included in the bid. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Inquiry #8: Sheet 62 DQ-5 does not reflect the lineal foot of 18" RCP in drainage 14 in the 18" RCP column.
Inquiry submitted 10/06/2022
Response #1:(BI#8)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/06/2022
Response #2:(BI#8)-An addendum will be issued to address this inquiry.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Response #3:(BI#8)-Refer to addendum #2, dated 10-17-22.
Response posted 10/19/2022
Inquiry #9: For Bid Item No. 27 Temporary Reinforced Silt Fence, what type is to be used? Please advise.
Inquiry submitted 10/06/2022
Response #1:(BI#9)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/06/2022
Response #2:(BI#9)-See Sections 13-10.02C Posts, 13.02E Wire Mesh, 13-02F Wire, 13.02G Anchors and 13-10.03E Temp Reinforced Silt Fence of the Std Specs. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Inquiry #10: In response to Response #2:(BI#2), our B1 ultimate assembly is 1,300lbs which exceeds your specification. Please look again....or reach out to me. HPTRM tensile is equivalent to mesh. ARMORMAX is used specifically to prevent slipouts. There seems to be some misinterpretation and confusion.
Inquiry submitted 10/11/2022
Response #1:(BI#10)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/11/2022
Response #2:(BI#10)-See response to BI#2. Bid per current bid documents.
Response posted 10/18/2022
Inquiry #11: is it the intent to place four anchor assemblies on each of the seven down drains listed in the plans? It seems like there has been a mistake for the quantity of anchor assemblies for each down drain. The quantity of anchor assemblies seems high. One of the down drains is 3 LF, and it states that it needs four anchor assemblies. Please advise.
Inquiry submitted 10/12/2022
Response #1:(BI#11)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/13/2022
Response #2:(BI#11)-Refer to addendum no.2, dated 10-17-22.
Response posted 10/18/2022
Inquiry #12: Fence Quantities on sheet Q-1 show Sta. 301+94.4 to 302+70.6 to be
Fence (Type BW 4-strand, Meta Post), 314 lf, but L-1 notes it as Fence (Type WM, Metal Post).
Per bid item list it should be Fence (Type BW, 4-strand, Metal Post).
Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 10/13/2022
Response #1:(BI#12)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/13/2022
Response #2:(BI#12)-Refer to addendum no.2, dated 10-17-22.
Response posted 10/18/2022
Inquiry #13: Please add a bid item for temporary rock fall/catch fencing to use in conjunction with the k-rail along the large cut slope from sta 313+00 to 338+00 in order to protect the traveling public from rocks damaging vehicles or causing accidents.
Inquiry submitted 10/13/2022
Response #1:(BI#13)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/13/2022
Response #2:(BI#13)-No need for a bid item for temp rock fall/catch fencing, because it is the contractor’s responsibility to perform the excavation safely and not hit the traveling public with rocks. Bid per current bid documents.
Response posted 10/18/2022
Inquiry #14: Please provide specs/drawings for "wire mesh reinforcement" required for TRM type C
Inquiry submitted 10/13/2022
Response #1:(BI#14)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/13/2022
Response #2:(BI#14)-See Section 21-2.02O(5) for Turf Reinforcement mats Type C. Bid per current bid documents.
Response posted 10/18/2022
Inquiry #15: Are the five days for bid item #32- contractor supplied biologist to provide biological monitoring or the nesting bird survey? Does this project require any biological monitoring?
Inquiry submitted 10/14/2022
Response #1:(BI#15)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 10/17/2022
Response #2:(BI#15)-The CSB (contractor supplied biologist) is for the nesting bird surveys. No other biological monitoring is necessary for this project. Bid per current bid documents.
Response posted 10/18/2022
The information provided in the responses to bidder inquiries is not a waiver of Section 2-1.07, "JOB SITE AND DOCUMENT EXAMINATION" of the Standard Specifications or any other provision of the contract, nor to excuse the contractor from full compliance with the contract. Bidders are cautioned that subsequent responses or contract addenda may change a previous response.