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 04-0J6424
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: Please confirm stain work for concrete barriers will only be one color.
Inquiry submitted 09/26/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 09/26/2019
Response #2:Please refer to Section 78 INCIDENTAL CONSTRUCTION of the Notice to Bidders and Special Provisions.
Response posted 10/10/2019
Inquiry #2: Can you please provide design assumption parameters to enable calculation for the Spiral Wound Liner;
Line Item Quantity Unit Description
150 710442 230 LF 24" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE
151 710446 800 LF 30" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE
152 38528 190 LF 42" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE
153 38529 160 LF 54" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE
Thank you !
Inquiry submitted 10/15/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/16/2019
Response #2:Please clarify your question. What specifically are you looking for?
Response posted 10/17/2019
Inquiry #3: In SP 12-4.02C(7)(b), it says that not more than 1 stationary closure is allowed in each direction of travel at one time. Since this project is 20 miles long, can this spec be revised to include provisions for more than 1 stationary closure in the direction of travel, as has been allowed on other long mileage projects?
Inquiry submitted 10/16/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/17/2019
Response #2:See Addendum 2.
Response posted 11/08/2019
Inquiry #4: 1) Bid item # 150 shows qty of 230 LF for 24" MSW Pipeliner
-Drainage No. 38 e calls for lining 325 LF with 24" MSW (DQ 30)
-Drainage No. 39 g calls for lining 228 LF with 24" MSW (DQ 32)
2) Drainage Quantities Summary Sheet No. 307 shows Drainage No. 40 f
213.8 LF to be lined using 30" MSW method
Drainage Quantities DQ 32 (Sheet No. 271) shows Drainage No. 40 f
213.8 LF to be lined using Class IV Trenchless method
Thank you for clarifying,
Inquiry submitted 10/16/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/17/2019
Response #2:See revised sheet DQ-68 in addendum #3.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #5: Will the Standard AASHTO M326 spec liner be allowed in place of MSW PVC liner for the following bid items?
150 710442 24" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE DIAMETER) LF 230
151 710446 30" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE DIAMETER) LF 800
152 038528 42" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE DIAMETER) LF 190
153 038529 54" MACHINE SPIRAL WOUND PVC PIPELINER (EXPANDABLE DIAMETER) LF 160
Inquiry submitted 10/17/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/18/2019
Response #2:No. The Standard AASHTO M326 spec liner will not be allowed in place of MSW PVC liner (expandable diameter).
Response posted 10/21/2019
Inquiry #6: Regarding Bid Item# 129 - 42" Welded Steel Pipe (0.250" Thick) Trenchless Culvert. Can we get exactly which specification the WSP should meet? Such as which type of coating and steel grade is wanted for this project. Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 10/23/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/23/2019
Response #2:Please see Section 1-1.01 of the Special Provisions which refers to Section 70 of the Standard Specifications. See Section 70-3 "WELDED STEEL PIPE DRAINAGE FACILITIES" of the Standard Specifications.
Response posted 10/28/2019
Inquiry #7: Clarification of Design Criteria Needed
The following information is typically provided in Caltrans Specifications for culvert rehab projects, Please provide the following information:
1) Design - partially or fully deteriorated pipe conditions
2) Rim elevation/invert depth- by pipe diameter
3) Traffic Loading
4) Soil modulus
5) Soil density
6) Water table
7) Ovality %
Inquiry submitted 10/24/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/28/2019
Response #2:1. The pipes that are being lined are only partially deteriorated.
2. Unless an addendum is issued, bid per plans.
3-6. This information is not required for pipes that are only partially deteriorated.
7. There is a separate pay item for Cleaning, Inspecting, and Preparing Culvert. Please refer to Section 71-3.01 of the Standard Specifications and Special Provisions.
Response posted 11/14/2019
Inquiry #8: More than One Million customers lost power in deliberate PG&E blackouts aimed at mitigating the risk of wind-damaged equipment sparking wildfires over the weekend and more power outages are expected this week.
Our office, field operations and day-to-day business operations are being heavily impacted by the power shutdowns. In addition, our subcontractors and suppliers are feeling the same negative effects. We are requesting that the bid opening be postponed for a minimum of one to two weeks due to the time lost with the intentional PG&E's power shutoffs.
Inquiry submitted 10/28/2019
Response #1:Unless if an addendum is issued, bids will open as scheduled.
Response posted 10/28/2019
Inquiry #9: When can we expect a response to Inquiry #7. Quotes/bids cannot be prepared without this information. Please advise.
Inquiry submitted 10/30/2019
Response #1:Submitted for considertion.
Response posted 10/30/2019
Inquiry #10: I have a question on the high-density polyurethane, soil stabilization, laid out in General Provisions applicable section 19. It shows the injections are going to depths of -15. Would you know of any additional levels? (example: starting at -5 -10 and ending at -15) and how did we come up the polyurethane pound amount?
Inquiry submitted 10/31/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/01/2019
Response #2:See detail on revised sheet C-40 in addendum #3.
Polyurethane amount is an estimate. Actual quantity will depend on existing field conditions.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #11: Please advise on the following:
1.) Shall Temporary Fiber Rolls be installed as Type 1 or Type 2?
2.) Clarify location for Imported Biofiltration Soil.
3.) Does Plant Establishment apply both to the Landscape and Erosion Control scopes or only Landscape?
Inquiry submitted 10/31/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/01/2019
Response #2:1) This is at the contractor's option.
2) Please see Water Pollution Control Details, sheet WD-1.
3) Plant Establishment Work applies to both Landscape and Erosion Control. See sections 20-4.01A to 20-4.03D of the Special Provisions.
Response posted 11/05/2019
Inquiry #12: 1) Will MBGR which is in conflict with the proposed drainage installation and needs to be reconstructed be paid for by separate unit price? DS 14d will destroy approx. 200 LF of MBGR when constructed. The plans show the old MBGR at this location prior to the first "Big Pave"
2) How will the existing rumble strip that is damaged by the new drainage construction crossing the highway be payed?
3) Will existing concrete inlet depressions (many newly poured) be required to be completely replaced where new pipe connections to existing drainage structures occur in the paved area? Or can we replace just the portion that is undermined? These occur on almost every new DS. If full replacement is required a new bid item should be added.
4) BI #149 "Sand Backfill" is quantified for only one location on the DQ drawings, DS 15i for 56.4 CY. BI #136 "Abandon Culvert" has a unit of 33 each. Please add the other 32 abandonments to BI #149 sand backfill.
5) DS 36h is a 42" CSP extension to DS 36f which is a new 42" WSP trenchless culvert. Why isn't the new 42" WSP trenchless culvert extended the remaining 40 LF? This will force a 37' deep excavation for a bore pit on an existing 1:1 slope.
Inquiry submitted 10/31/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/01/2019
Response #2:1) See revised sheet D-12 in addendum #3.
2) See note on revised sheet C-9 and revised sheet PDQ-11 in addendum #3.
3) See new sheets DD-11A, Q-13A and revised sheets D-1, Q-8 in addendum #3.
4) Bid per plans and specifications.
5) See revised sheets D-23, DP-29 in addendum #3.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #13: 1) The construction details for the drainage on sheet 65 show the HMA thickness over RSC in the highway crossings at 6.6". Can we place RSC to within 3" of finished grade and place 3" of HMA for Case 3 (perm rock/ groundwater areas), and Case 1 (reduced working hour) crossings south of Lytton Springs Road ? These crossings will not be possible for the lane closures hours as shown.
2) The following trenchless culverts lack the needed permanent ROW to construct the bore pits: DS 35e, 46f. Has Caltrans secured TCE to construct these crossings?
3) The following drainage systems are either crossing the highway or ramps, paralleling the highway in the paved area, or crossing local paved streets and not shown on sheet 484 for HMA over RSC: DS 2.4b, 2.4d, 12b, 25q, 40j, 45e, 45q, 56b. Can you make the necessary changes to the plan sheets and bid items to reflect these changes?
Inquiry submitted 11/01/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/01/2019
Response #2:1) See revised sheet C-9 in addendum #3.
2) For 35e, bid per plans and specifications.
For 46f, see revised sheet D-28 in addendum #3.
3) See revised sheet Q-17 in addendum #3.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #14: Were any Geotechnical Borings taken at the locations of the trenchless crossings at the following Drainage Systems: 15, 19.1, 25, 35, 36, 40, and 46?
If so, please provide the geotechnical report for those locations.
Inquiry submitted 11/01/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/04/2019
Response #2:See Addendum 2.
Response posted 11/08/2019
Inquiry #15: In regards to Item 148 "Concrete Invert Paving" please address the following:
1) Will the welded wire mesh be installed on dobies per the detail on plan sheet 230, or are welded metal chairs be required as noted in section 71-3.04?
2) The detail also shows grout ports to be installed at 8' spacing. If the bottom of the existing culvert is gone since a void is clearly shown on the detail, where will the grout ports be needed? Will grout ports be paid as change order work for void filling?
Inquiry submitted 11/05/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/05/2019
Response #2:1. Either dobies or chairs are acceptable per Section 52 of the Standard Specifications.
2. The pipe inverts to be paved are not gone. Much of the original coating is gone and there are some perforations along the length. The extent of the voids that may have developed around the pipe are unknown. See Section 71 of the Standard Specifications for payment of the grout used to fill any voids.
Response posted 11/08/2019
Inquiry #16: On plan sheet 3 of 614 indicates that the new structural section #4 has 0.15' HMA-A over 0.20' RHMA-G is this correct??
Inquiry submitted 11/05/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/05/2019
Response #2:See revised sheet X-1 in addendum #3.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #17: In the special provisions page 30, Charts G3 & G4 are the only closures charts for PM R43.3 to R54.2 for both NB and SB, but these charts have a 14 calendar day restriction per event. What constitutes and event? Should their be closure chart for this area for the other operations that don't have K-rail closing lanes?
Inquiry submitted 11/05/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/05/2019
Response #2:See revised closure charts in addendum #3. These charts apply to all closures.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #18: The quantity for Bid Item #87, a final pay item, is 22 CY. Our take-off shows that the bid quantity should be almost 3 times what is currently listed. Can Caltrans check both this quantity and the rebar quantity, Bid Item #94?
Inquiry submitted 11/05/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/05/2019
Response #2:See revised DQ-sheets in addendum #3.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #19: The work shown for adjust inlet to grade shows that there is a concrete inlet depression being installed in addition to raising the inlet. How do we get paid for the removal of the existing CID, if any?
How do we get paid for the new CID? There is no bid item for this.
Can we re-use the existing grate?
Inquiry submitted 11/07/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/13/2019
Response #2:1) See new sheets DD-11A, Q-13A and revised sheets D-1, Q-8 in addendum #3.
2) No, new frames and grates are required and are included in the cost of adjusting the inlets. See Standard Specifications section 71-5.01. Also, per the special provisions (section 71-7.01A), the frame and grates from inlets to be adjusted are to be salvaged.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #20: On sheet # 534, ECQ-1, under Erosion Control Quantities At Asphalt Composite Vegetation Control there are no types, i.e., Type 1 or Type 2 for the Compost; please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 11/07/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/08/2019
Inquiry #21: On sheet # 534, ECQ-1, under Erosion Control Quantities At Asphalt Composite Vegetation Control there are no types, i.e., Type 1 or Type 2 for the Compost; please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 11/07/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/08/2019
Response #2:The compost type is 'Medium' as called out in the tables on the ECL-1 sheet.
Response posted 11/13/2019
Inquiry #22: On plan sheet Q-8 under the Band Slab Chart, it shows 94 CY of structural concrete, approach slab, at the Grant UC. This appears to be paid for under Bid Item #83. On plan sheet 604 of 614, it shows the new approach slabs at the Grant UC as being Type R, which are paid for as part of Bid Item #85. Is this a duplication and should the concrete be RSC due to the limited lane closure hours?
Inquiry submitted 11/08/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/08/2019
Response #2:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/08/2019
Response #3:Should the concrete be RSC? - Please bid per plans and specs.
For Structural Concrete, Approach Slab (Type R), please refer to Section 51-5.03D of the Standard Specifications. Item no. 83 Structural Concrete, Approach Slab is for the band slab at Grant UC as shown on plan sheet Q-8; no approach slab work included.
Response posted 11/20/2019
Inquiry #23: The construction details for environmentally sensitive areas beginning on C-17 and ending on C-38 show temporary high-visibility fence for many drainage systems to be installed in the median and down the very steep slopes. Many, if not most of the locations including the very steep slopes limit your work area to a 20' fenced width. Installing pipe down these very steep slopes will be almost impossible since 6' of width will be taken up by the trench alone. That will leave no access adjacent to the trench. Will Caltrans allow a minimum 30' width for the subject work areas?
Inquiry submitted 11/08/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/12/2019
Response #2:No changes. Bid per plans and specs.
Response posted 11/19/2019
Inquiry #24: Is there Cable railing on this project?
Addendum #1, issued on October 9th, has plan sheet DD-11, which shows cable railing.
Please clarify the quantity of the cable railing and under which bid item number is going to be paid under?
Inquiry submitted 11/08/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/12/2019
Response #2:See revised sheet Q-17 in addendum #3.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #25: Is the removal of the concrete pavement and base for the approach slabs included in the approach slab items or should it be included in Bid Item #79?
Inquiry submitted 11/08/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/12/2019
Response #2:The removal of the concrete pavement and base for the approach slabs is paid under item no. 85, Structural Concrete, Approach Slab (Type R). Please refer to Section 51-5.03D(2) of the Standard Specifications.
Response posted 11/18/2019
Inquiry #26: Section 36-3.01C(6)b, indicates the profiles needed for the target 60/75 Percentage of Improvement smoothness pay factors however, section 39 is missing the incentive/dis-incentive smoothness pay factors. Will this project include the smoothness incentive/dis-incentive pay factors? Also, can the state provide the supplemental smoothness data in .ppf Proval format?
Inquiry submitted 11/11/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/12/2019
Response #2:See added Section 39 specifications in addendum #3 and #4 for smoothness incentive/dis-incentive pay factors.
For this type of project (crack and seat), no supplemental smoothness data will be provided.
Response posted 12/11/2019
Inquiry #27: “The Scope item “79-1.01D(3)(d) Ground Surface Settlement and Subsurface Displacement Monitoring†provides requirements for installing and monitoring extensometers and surface monitoring points. These requirements result in a large quantity of survey monitoring and extensometer locations. For example, 100 to 150 ground surface monitoring points will be required to be surveyed daily for each trenchless construction crossing (over 850 surface monitoring points total). Extensometer requirements would result in over 500 extensometer sensors, and over 112 drilled holes within highway pavement and shoulders. The extensometer heads would also require logging and communication equipment (to efficiently meet the monitoring frequency) in traffic rated manholes. With these specified quantities, the costs on these monitoring systems will be very high (in the multi-million dollar range). To reduce monitoring costs, would Caltrans consider reducing the ground surface monitoring points and extensometer locations or allowing alternative monitoring methods such as horizontal shape arrays (SAA). These potential alternative monitoring concepts are described below:
• Reduced locations for ground surface monitoring points and extensometers – Locate extensometers on the highway 101 shoulders along both travel directions over the proposed trenchless installation resulting in four extensometers per crossing. Reduce the extensometer anchors to 5 vertical locations spaced evenly beginning 5 feet above the proposed trenchless pipe. Limit ground surface monitoring points to the four extensometer head locations. This would result in lower costs and minimize disruption to traffic during installation and monitoring.
• Shape Arrays (SAA) – Use horizontal SAA in lieu of extensometers and ground surface monitoring points. The SAA is a string of MEMS gravity sensors that can measure tilt very accurately in 3 dimensions. With an SAA system installed horizontally 5 to 15 feet above the centerline of the trenchless culverts and below the pavement section, the settlement can be monitored in real-time along the entire culvert length rather than at discrete extensometer locations. This would result in lower costs, increased settlement data coverage, and eliminate the need to disrupt traffic during installation and monitoring. An additional benefit of the SAA is that the sensor string can be removed and reused at the completion of the project.â€
Inquiry submitted 11/19/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/19/2019
Response #2:Bid per plans and specs.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #28: We just received Addendum 3 for this project. We have the following questions:
1) Why was the 54" MSW PVC liner requirement deleted? The manufacturer can provide a tight fit liner that meets the project design requirements.
2) The bid quantities for 42" are not adding up. On page 11 of 21 DQ - 68, it lists 190' of 42" MSW PVC lining but the bid form, bid items 150 is for 24" and 151 for 30" and no bid item for the 42". Please reconcile.
Thank you,
Jacqueline Jaques
Inquiry submitted 11/27/2019
Response #1:1) Based on the pipe size being greater than 42”, it was decided not to use MSW PVC expandable diameter pipeliner. And based on the pipe being in reasonable condition, it was decided to delete this pipe from the scope of work.
2) The addendum Bid Item List only includes items that are deleted, added or revised. The 42” MSW PVC Pipeliner quantity has not changed so it is in the original Bid item List in the Notice to Bidders and Special Provisions.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Inquiry #29: Can Caltrans please provide PPF files of the existing roadway so a smoothness analysis can be conducted prior to bidding?
Inquiry submitted 12/02/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/03/2019
Response #2:For this type of project (crack and seat), no existing data will be provided.
Response posted 12/04/2019
Inquiry #30: Will inertial profiling for the existing surface be done after crack and seat is complete? If not, this would not be an appropriate reference for determining the target MRI as it will be significantly smoother before crack and seat.
Inquiry submitted 12/04/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/05/2019
Response #2:For this project (crack, seat and overlay) target 60 must be used regardless of existing MRI. See added Section 39 specifications in addendum #3 and #4.
Response posted 12/11/2019
Inquiry #31: Several runs of Midwest Guardrail & appurtenances at bridges are to be partially constructed behind K-railing during Stage 2. These runs are later completed in Stage 6.
Are Temporary Terminal Systems required to be installed, and later removed? If so, how are they to be paid?
Inquiry submitted 12/05/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/06/2019
Response #2:See Note 1 on Sheet SC-13. Means and methods are up to the contractor. If used, temporary terminal systems will not be paid for.
Response posted 12/06/2019
Inquiry #32: The CA High Design Manual Section 850-34 dated December 30th, 2015 warns against specifying plastic pipe in areas with a potential for fire. This project lists Alternative Pipe Culvert in the Bid Schedule. Will Caltrans still allow for plastic pipe to be used on this project?
Inquiry submitted 12/06/2019
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/06/2019
Response #2:Bid per plans and specifications.
Response posted 12/12/2019
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.