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 04-4G8204

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: The project plans and construction sequencing plans do not show a cofferdam for the Pier 2 Pile and Cap construction. As the 36" pile Cut-off elevation is below water in all phases of work, this is necessary to enable construction of the Pier 2 Cap. This applies for the formed pourbacks in the cap for both stage 2 and stage 3, as well as the cap closure pour. Please provide details for allowable cofferdam limits.
Also, was a temporary cofferdam contemplated during the permitting process and is one allowed under the permits?


Inquiry submitted 02/13/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/14/2020




Inquiry #2: The SFBRWQCB permit (June 20, 2018) identifies "installation of twelve 24-inch CISS piles in the creek to support the bridge." However the plan sheets identify 12 ea 36" CISS pile. Please confirm the permit is still valid despite these differences.
Inquiry submitted 02/14/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/20/2020


Response #2:The Water Quality Certification issued by SFBRWQCB on June 20, 2018 is still valid to install the 36 CISS piles.
Response posted 02/20/2020




Inquiry #3: Do RFI responses from all previous bids apply to this advertisement?
Inquiry submitted 02/14/2020

Response #1:No. Only current plans, specs and RFI's will pertain to this advertised project.
Response posted 02/14/2020




Inquiry #4: The contract duration is 200 working days, but specification 8-1.10C maintains a construction end date of November 30, 2020 until $10,000 liquidated damages start. This leaves approximately 150 work days to complete the project. Based off the limitations of the in water work window and long lead times for the specialty pile and precast elements, this is not enough time to complete the project. To complete the project as currently specified will require several shifts and a lot of premium time and potential Liquidated Damages risks reflected in the bids. Please confirm.
Inquiry submitted 02/14/2020

Response #1:Submitted fro consideration.
Response posted 02/14/2020




Inquiry #5: The contract states that the construction end date is November 30th, 2020, at which point contractor will incur liquidated damages of $10,000 a day if the work the work isn’t complete. A project completion date of November 30th 2020 would result in fewer than 170 working days (depending on NTP) not 200 as stated in the notice to bidders. Please clarify the anticipated working days.

Furthermore, in speaking with steel suppliers, the current lead time for the 24” pipe is June and the 36” is out 11-13 weeks from the time of order placement. Additionally time for thermal spray coating would have to be added to that time frame as well. IF the contract is awarded in April and the purchase order is written and accepted by the middle of the month, that puts the 24” delivered to the site in late June/ early July and the 36” wouldn’t be ready and painted until August. Based on this information, it isn’t possible to complete the work within the current contract duration or the 2020 in-water work window. Would the district consider pushing the contract start and completion date one full calendar year?

Inquiry submitted 02/19/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/19/2020




Inquiry #6: In the Information Handout, page 6 of the Materials Information section has a paragraph for As-built Foundation Data. This paragraph mentions as-built plans from the original bridge dated 1940, and two additional contracts dated 1951 and 1964. Will Caltrans provide, as supplemental information, additional as-built drawings of the existing bridge from these previous contracts?

Can Caltrans provide any further information in regards to the existing bridge dimensions, depths, and location in relation to the new structure? Existing abutment dimensions are especially of importance as that will influence what type and depth of cofferdam will be required to remove them and install the new abutment.

Inquiry submitted 02/19/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/19/2020


Response #2:No further information will be provided. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 03/13/2020




Inquiry #7: This is a follow up to the response from Inquiry #2. Please confirm if the RFI responses from the two previous 04-4G8204 bids are valid or not valid. For instance, if all of the responses are not binding to this procurement, then contractors would need to submit the same inquiries again.
Inquiry submitted 02/19/2020

Response #1:Bidder inquiries are not part of the contract. Base your bids on the most current plans and specs.

If a previous question is relevant to the currently advertised plans and specs, then yes, ask the question again.
Response posted 02/19/2020




Inquiry #8: San Rafael Harbor Bridge 04-4G8204 – bid item 57 – TPMS (Temp Prefab Modular Steel) Bridge
Sheet 98 – Roadway Clarification

The typical section shown on sheet 98 shows the TPMS with an overall out-to-out of 24’-3” and a
roadway of 18’-0”. The dimensions shown match those of an Acrow EW18 system.
This system and roadway width was discussed between CALTRANS Design Engineering Services group and Acrow in 2017-2019. It is highly likely the temporary bridge foundation for this contract (designed by CALTRANS) is based on the reactions (bridge LL + DL + factorization) of the EW18 superstructure.

This is assumed because Acrow provided the bridge reactions for this roadway width during the type
selection/design phase.
If Memo to Designers 12-9 September 2018 (see Attachment B) is introduced, one will find requirements
for the TPMS. With respect to Memo requirements, the guardrail height and spacing from the inner truss line are provided. The typical section shown above does accurately provide the actual roadway width when taking these provisions into account.
The only possible way to meet the design memo for guardrail spacing and provide an EW18 model which the current foundation system is based on, is to encroach into the roadway. It is estimated to provide a 3- tube guardrail system with a spacing of 15” from edge of rail to the inner truss line will provide a roadway width of approx 16.5’.
In addition, a cross section from the original letting (bid) of contract 04-4G8204 from November 2018 show that a 16’ minimum roadway was allowable.

Based on this information, please reduce the minimum roadway width from 18' to 16' as previously allowed. Thank you

Inquiry submitted 02/21/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/21/2020




Inquiry #9: Why is this re-bidding?
Is this expected to be postponed or stay to the March 3rd bid opening date?

Inquiry submitted 02/24/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/24/2020


Response #2:No qualified bidders for the previous bid.
Bid opening has not changed and is still March 3, 2020.

Response posted 02/27/2020




Inquiry #10: Specification 49-3.03C(2)states "Piles must not be cleaned out below the top of soil plug elevation specified under section 49-2.01C(3). Place a seal course of a minumum thickness of 3 feet on top of the soil plug surface."
1. A seal course identified on the plan sheets for the pile. The plan sheets show the rebar cage rests on top of the soil plug. Verify a seal course is required.
2. Verify this specification if for both the 36" and 24" diameter piles.
3. What is the required time and strength needed for the seal course before the pile can be cleaned out and following steps can occur?
4. Is there a flatness or surface prep requirement on top of the seal course?
5. Which bid item is this work to be included in?


Inquiry submitted 02/27/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 03/02/2020


Response #2:1. Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per current contract documents.

2. Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per current contract documents.

3. Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per current contract documents.
No further information will be provided. Please bid per the current contract documents.

4. No further information will be provided. Please bid per the current contract documents.

5. The Bid items are, TEMPORARY BRIDGE (FURNISH 24" CAST-IN-STEEL-SHELL CONCRETE PILING), FURNISH 24" CAST-IN-STEEL SHELL CONCRETE PILE and FURNISH 36" CAST-IN-STEEL SHELL CONCRETE PILING.
Response posted 03/10/2020




Inquiry #11: What is the turn around and time frame allowed for results of the dynamic analysis? Given there is only one 55 hour weekend for each phase of piledriving, changes to the depths shown on the plans will create several issues. 1. If the pile need to go deeper, there will be added durations for field pile splices that will likely require additional road closures and pile driving work windows. 2. Additional pile sections will need to be ordered with the original orders because of the very long lead times. Will contractors need to purchase this addtional pile and include in our bids? What is the recommended additional pile to purchase for 24" and 36"? 3. Revised lengths will required resubmittal and refabrication of the rebar cages or a delay in the cage deliveries until the depths are confirmed. 4. Will changes in depth and the downstream impacts be considered change order work?
Inquiry submitted 02/27/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 03/02/2020


Response #2:No further information will be provided. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 03/04/2020




Inquiry #12: Bid Item 108 Minor Concrete (Curb & Gutter) has a pay quantity of 41cy this appears to be double the quantity shown on the plans. Please revise quantity to reflect what is shown.
Inquiry submitted 02/27/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/28/2020


Response #2:Please bid on the quantity as shown in the current contract document.
Response posted 03/06/2020




Inquiry #13: Per Special Provisions Section 49-1.01D(4) Paragraph 2. states "If pile load testing is performed...", however, since it is not evident in the plans or specifications the Contractor assumes there is no load testing (only dynamic testing). Please, confirm.
Inquiry submitted 02/27/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 03/02/2020


Response #2:Correct, there is no load testing for the piles. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 03/06/2020




Inquiry #14: Per Special Provisions Section 49-1.01D(4) final Paragraph states "Impact hammers must be equipped with a manufactured shroud or other authorized noise abatement systems...", if there is nothing on the market to use, the Contractor assumes it will not be required to manufacture a prototype product in an attempt to be compliant with this statement. Please, confirm this is correct.
Inquiry submitted 02/27/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/28/2020


Response #2:Shrouds or other noise abatement systems should be commercially available. The contractor will not be required to produce a proto type product.
Response posted 03/02/2020




Inquiry #15: Plan Sheet SC-1 when paired with structures Staging Plan No. 1, clearly shows 24" CISS piles outside the "Stage 1" traffic limits. Some of this work can be done without impacting traffic during normal hours. Since the schedule is so tight and the Work is so complicated and risky, the Contractor assumes it will have to perform as much CISS work outside of the 55-hour work windows, as long as it can be performed under the Stage 1 traffic alignment or normal ramp closures shown in the Traffic Closure Charts.

Please, confirm this is acceptable.

Inquiry submitted 02/27/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/28/2020


Response #2:No. Your assumption is not correct.. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 03/04/2020




Inquiry #16: Plan Sheet SC-2 and SC-3 when paired with structures Staging Plan No. 2, clearly shows CISS and sheet piles outside the "Stage 2" or "Stage 3" traffic limits. Some of this work can be done without impacting traffic during normal hours. Since the schedule is so tight and the Work is so complicated and risky, the Contractor assumes it will have to perform as much CISS and sheet pile work outside of the 55-hour work windows, as long as it can be performed under the appropriate Stage traffic alignment or normal ramp closures shown in the Traffic Closure Charts.

Please, confirm this is acceptable.

Inquiry submitted 02/27/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/28/2020


Response #2:All pile driving activities shall take place only during the three nonconsecutive 55 hours weekend full off-ramp closures.
Response posted 03/02/2020




Inquiry #17: Addendum #2 came out February 28th stating additional information will be provided in a future addendum. The new bid date of April 2 is 2.5 weeks away, this additional information has not been send out yet. Also, there are several constructability and schedule concerns asked in RFI's that have yet to be answered by Caltrans. Also, the coronavirus issue has put a lot of additional pressures on companies trying to perform work in the current environment. Is this bid date going to hold? When will additional information be provided for contractors to evaluate the additional measures?
Inquiry submitted 03/16/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 03/19/2020




Inquiry #18: Is bidding and working on the project "Essential" and will the bid and project proceed considering the latest California shutdown?
Inquiry submitted 03/20/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 03/23/2020


Response #2:Bidding and work in the project will proceed as per current schedule.
Response posted 03/25/2020




Inquiry #19: Will bid item 3 be adjusted to reflect the correct number of working days as shown in addendum 3?
Inquiry submitted 03/27/2020

Response #1:See Addendum 4.
Response posted 04/02/2020




Inquiry #20: 1. When should the contractor expect Notice to Proceed for this project?
2. If the contract completion date is 11/30/2021, and there are 240 working days in the contract, is it safe to assume that NTP will be around 1/1/2021? Large and long term lead items such as steel and pre-cast units will need to have a purchase order executed shortly after the bid date in order to lock in the agreed pricing. If the contractor has to wait an additional 6-9 months before executing a purchase order there could be a substantial swing in pricing, especially with the current global instability.
3. If NTP isn’t until January 2021, will the contractor be able to receive progress payments prior to NTP?

Inquiry submitted 04/01/2020

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/02/2020


Response #2:1) Notice to Proceed is is concurrent with Contract Approval by the Attorney General.

2) Order long term lead items as you see fit immediately after Contract Approval by the Attorney General. Items not immediately installed will be paid for as Materials-on-Hand. Item work partially or wholly installed will be paid as normal progress payments each month.

3) See above answers for questions #1 & #2.
Response posted 04/06/2020


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.