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 08-0K1224
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: When will CAD files be made available for this contract?
Inquiry submitted 12/09/2020
Response #1:Please go to the Caltrans Bidding Website for the information.
Response posted 12/10/2020
Inquiry #2: Sheet No. 386 DD-10 provides details for a modified apron. Section A-A and B-B notes indicate utilizing #4 rebar but are pointing to the line type that has been used for welded wire fabric in other details. Confirm whether this is #4 rebar or WWF.
Inquiry submitted 12/09/2020
Response #1:It should be called out for WWF. We're going to provide addendum to address this issue.
Response posted 12/10/2020
Response #2:Addendum No.3 is currently being prepared to address your concern.
Response posted 01/20/2021
Inquiry #3: Link to register for the mandatory pre-bid is not working? Please provide updated link so we may register.
Thank you
Inquiry submitted 12/09/2020
Response #1:The link to register for the mandatory pre-bid is working. You can try by coping the entire link and paste it to the Web browser
Response posted 12/10/2020
Inquiry #4: Link is not working. I copied and pasted per the response to the RFI
Receive the following message
We're sorry but we've experienced an error processing your request.
Please contact the Event Organizer.
Inquiry submitted 12/11/2020
Response #1:The following is the link that we copied over from the "NOTICE TO BIDDERS" for this project and the link works.
https://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/eventReg?oeidk=a07eheyihjzd591a361&oseq=&c=&ch=
Response posted 12/11/2020
Inquiry #5: Page 13 of the NTB & Special Provisions provides a list of Supplementary Project Information to be provided that includes: 1) Digital Terrain Model 2) Design Alignments and Profiles 3) Cross Sections in DGN and PDF 4) Digital Design Model 5) Hesperia OH as-builts.
Currently the website only contains #2 (Design Alignment and Profiles) and just the Slope State Report portion of #3 (Cross Sections in DGN & PDF). How can we obtain the balance of the supplementary information/electronic files.
Inquiry submitted 12/14/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 12/14/2020
Response #2:We will provide an addendum shortly to address this issue.
Response posted 12/15/2020
Response #3:Please refer to addendum #1
Response posted 12/18/2020
Inquiry #6: Based on Section 9-1.08 Renewable Diesel Equipment Verification. Should this item be an Allowance item since it is specified as $500.00 Per authorized Monthly Submittal?
Inquiry submitted 12/16/2020
Response #1:The Department does not use allowance items in its bid items and the unit price stated is the amount that will be paid for each authorized monthly RD submittal.
Response posted 12/17/2020
Inquiry #7: Bid Item 100 identifies 600 LF of 36" Grouted. Drainage Quantity sheet DQ-16 identifies 4 reaches totaling 430.1lf. Can the bid quantity be adjusted prior to bid time.
Inquiry submitted 12/23/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 12/23/2020
Response #2:Refer to plansheet DQ-16 asterisk note. Both Machine Spiral Wound PVC Pipeliner (Grouted 36â€) and Machine Spiral Wound PVC Pipeliner (Grouted 39â€) quantities will be paid under bid item 710418 - Machine Spiral Wound PVC Pipeliner (Grouted 36â€). 430.7 + 162.0 ≅ 600 LF
Response posted 01/07/2021
Inquiry #8: Under which stage should the contractor remove the crossover temporary structural sections T1, T2, and T3, and construct the permanent median improvements in the crossover areas? This appears to be missing from the plans.
Inquiry submitted 12/23/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 12/24/2020
Response #2:Refer to plan sheets 498 and 508, construction note No.8.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #9: The project plans indicate that this project is in a High Desert pavement climate region and the SP indicate that Hesperia OH is in a freeze-thaw climate which would require epoxy coated reinforcement for JPCP, bridge and roadway barriers, and approach slabs.
Please clarify whether epoxy coated reinforcement will be required for
1) BI 64 Structural Concrete, Headwall
2) BI 65 Structural Concrete, Drainage Inlet
3) BI 104 Concrete (Channel Lining)
4) BIs 66, 67, 111-114 Minor Concrete bid items.
Inquiry submitted 01/04/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/05/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Response #3:Refer to addendum No.2.
Response posted 01/20/2021
Inquiry #10: Standard Specification 90-1.02I give concrete requirements for projects specified in the Special Provisions to be in a freeze-thaw area. The project Special Provisions section 1-1.09 indicate that only the Hesperia OH bridge is considered in a freeze-thaw area.
Can you confirm that the requirements of 90-1.02I will only apply to the barrier, paving notch extensions and approach slabs at Hesperia OH. We understand that Standard Specification 40-1.02 will apply to JPCP concrete
Inquiry submitted 01/05/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/06/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/07/2021
Response #3:Please bid per contract documents.
Response posted 01/19/2021
Inquiry #11: Railroad Protective Liability Insurance is referenced in the Information Handout, however, it does not include insurance requirements or limits. Please confirm, is Railroad Protective Liability Insurance required?
Inquiry submitted 01/06/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/07/2021
Response #2:Railroad Protective Liability Insurance is required. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #12: Page 29 of Specifications, Section 12-3.25(2) Materials state the rental quote amount for AmorGuard system.
This Quote expires 12/31/20 per the last paragraph, please advise on updated rental charges.
Inquiry submitted 01/06/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/07/2021
Response #2:Refer to 12-3.25(2), contact supplier for the updated rental quote.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #13: Please provide layout plan sheets with the structural section hatching patterns turned off. This will help with readability of the plans.
Inquiry submitted 01/08/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents
Response posted 01/11/2021
Inquiry #14: Due to State mandated COVID-19 restrictions, travel limitations and others, we respectfully request a time extension of 3 weeks for the Project 08-0K1224.
Inquiry submitted 01/11/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/11/2021
Response #2:Please refer to addendum No.5
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #15: For Stages 1, 2 and 3, Special Provision 12-3.35A (1) describes the use of an Automated Work Zone Information System (AWIS). The project plans are silent on the use of an AWIS and do not provide any plans, details or system quantities. In addition, payment for the AWIS is not discussed is SP 12-4.02C (12) (d) Payment. If required, please provide AWIS plans, details and quantities and confirm which Bid Item is to be used for payment.
Inquiry submitted 01/11/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/12/2021
Response #2:An addendum is being prepared to address the concerns.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Response #3:AWIS will be removed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 02/10/2021
Inquiry #16: Will the contractor be able to use the Emergency Vehicle (EV) lanes during closures to facilitate construction?
Inquiry submitted 01/11/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/12/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Response #3:Yes, however, traffic control must be coordinated with the RE and CHP.
Response posted 02/04/2021
Inquiry #17: The Caltrans Pavement Climate Regions map shows this project as half in South Mountain climate region and half in Desert climate region. Per page 2 of the plans it shows this project as High Desert. High Desert, per the Caltrans Pavement Climate Region, is for just north of Lone Pine to around Topaz Lake. Calling this project High Desert will exclude proven sources of aggregates for concrete per 40-1.02B(3) Aggregate: For coarse aggregate in high desert and high mountain climate regions, the loss must not exceed 25 percent when tested under California Test 211 with 500 revolutions. Please classify this project as Desert Pavement Climate Region.
Inquiry submitted 01/11/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/12/2021
Response #2:Project is classified as High Desert Climate Region. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #18: Per the specials, it states: “Replace section 39-2.01B(2)(b) with: Treat aggregate with lime slurry with marination.†The specials then go on to state: “ Replace the row for Moisture susceptibility (min, psi, wet strength) in the table in item 3 in the list in the paragraph of section 39-2.02A(4)(e) with: Moisture susceptibility (min, tensile strength ratio) (AASHTO T 283) (70). Some District 8 projects have removed the lime slurry with marination requirement and allowed HMA producers to meet the 70 TSR requirement. Will Caltrans remove the lime requirement or will Caltrans allow for dry lime which gives similar results as lime slurry marination.
Inquiry submitted 01/11/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/12/2021
Response #2:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #19: Will Caltrans please provide the list of attendees at the Prebid meeting?
Inquiry submitted 01/14/2021
Response #1:An email will be sent by the District small business unit to all attendees of the Pre-bid meeting.
Response posted 01/15/2021
Inquiry #20: Bid Item 19 – Temporary Crash Cushion Module has a bid quantity of 82 EA. There are 82 Temporary Crash Cushion Arrays on the job, not modules. Please clarify if Bid Item 19 is for modules or arrays. If the bid item is for temporary crash cushion module, please change the bid quantity.
Inquiry submitted 01/14/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/19/2021
Response #2:Addendum No.3 is currently being prepared to address your concern.
Response posted 01/20/2021
Inquiry #21: Traffic Handling Details Sh. THD-2, show 2 Armorguard panels in a Armorguard Temporary Barrier System. Traffic Handling Plans make it seem like each Armorguard Temporary Barrier System has 4 panels, an example of this can be seen on plan sh. TH-70.
Please clarify how many Armorguard panels will be used in each Armorguard Temporary Barrier System.
Inquiry submitted 01/14/2021
Response #1:Refer to plan THD-1 for length of opening (100’), refer to plan THD-2 for number per location (4).
Response posted 01/20/2021
Inquiry #22: Inquiry #18: Per the specials, it states: “Replace section 39-2.01B(2)(b) with: Treat aggregate with lime slurry with marination.†The specials then go on to state: “ Replace the row for Moisture susceptibility (min, psi, wet strength) in the table in item 3 in the list in the paragraph of section 39-2.02A(4)(e) with: Moisture susceptibility (min, tensile strength ratio) (AASHTO T 283) (70). Some District 8 projects have removed the lime slurry with marination requirement and allowed HMA producers to meet the 70 TSR requirement. Will Caltrans remove the lime requirement or will Caltrans allow for dry lime which gives similar results as lime slurry marination.
Based on Inquiry 18, if aggregates meet the Caltrans specification of 0-4 plasticity index, why wouldn't any approved liquid anti-strip be allowed if the materials meet the 70 TSR requirement?
Inquiry submitted 01/14/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 01/19/2021
Inquiry #23: Will there be a requirement for staining the concrete barriers on this project? We do not see a specific bid item, but we want to confirm it will not be bundled with line items for the barriers.
Inquiry submitted 01/15/2021
Response #1:Bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/20/2021
Inquiry #24: Advertised quantity for bid item 19 (Temporary Crash Cushion Module) shows 82 EA, while our takeoff is 819 EA. Please check the quantity.
Inquiry submitted 01/19/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents
Response posted 01/19/2021
Response #2:Addendum No.3 is currently being prepared to address your concern.
Response posted 01/20/2021
Inquiry #25: Bid Item 57 – JPCP-ISC, special provisions note to that this item will comply with section 40-4 Typical JPCP specifications.
These quantities show to be mainly gore and entrance ramp areas. Please advise if these areas are to follow standard plans P1 for JPCP or P35 for JPCP Ramp Transition Paving Details. Which Reinforcement details will be followed?
Also, will Smoothness Improvement profiling be omitted in these areas?
Inquiry submitted 01/19/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/20/2021
Response #2:Std plan P1 is for new construction. P35 is to construct gore paving ,and ramp entrance / exits. Smoothness improvement profiling will be omitted.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Inquiry #26: Layout plans show a type 60 MF barrier from station 345+71 to 347+95, but no quantity for this is shown on the quantity sheets. Please adjust quantity sheet accordingly.
Inquiry submitted 01/20/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/20/2021
Response #2:An addendum is being prepared to address the concerns
Response posted 01/22/2021
Response #3:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #27: Building stage 1A thru 1E per the staging plans will lead to the longitudinal joints in the pavement not lining up with the final lane lines. Is this the intent of the design and will this be accepted in the final acceptance of the project?
Inquiry submitted 01/20/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/20/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents
Response posted 01/22/2021
Inquiry #28: When will the list of attendees for the mandatory pre-bid meeting posted?
Inquiry submitted 01/20/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/20/2021
Response #2:A report has been sent out to all attendees.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Inquiry #29: The following locations show the construction of Pavement Structural Section 1 (1.25’ JPCP, 0.30 HMA-A, 0.70 AS). This work is adjacent to traffic and construction will require Krail. The Traffic Handling Plans do not show these locations covered in Stages 1 through 5. Please provide Traffic Handling Plans which encompass these locations.
• (Sheet L1) - 50’ Lt “I15SB-E1†Sta. 76+86.87 to 50’ Lt “I15SB-E1†Sta. 80+51.91
• (Sheet L1/L2) - 50’ Rt “I15NB-E1†Sta. 77+40.88 to 50’ Rt “I15NB-E1†Sta. 92+13.15
• (Sheet L3) - 50’ Rt “I15NB-E1†Sta. 97+95.00 to 50’ Rt “I15NB-E1†Sta. 103+31.20
• (Sheet L4) - 50’ Rt “I15NB-E1†Sta. 108+95.00 to 50’ Rt “I15NB-E1†Sta. 113+29.33
Inquiry submitted 01/20/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/21/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Response #3:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #30: Traffic Charts J5 & J6 show complete Ramp Closures 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. The Charts do not specify how many times they can be used per location or the closure duration. Please provide this information for each Ramp described within Traffic Charts J5 & J6.
Inquiry submitted 01/20/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/21/2021
Response #2:An addendum is being prepared to address the concerns.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Response #3:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #31: When will the list of attendees for the mandatory pre-bid meeting posted?
Inquiry submitted 01/21/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/21/2021
Response #2:Refer to inquiry #28.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Inquiry #32: With regards to inquiry #11, can Caltrans please provide the required limits for railroad insurance as well as the requirements.
Inquiry submitted 01/22/2021
Response #1:Please refer to page 2 of the information handout, "Railroad Clearance - January 28, 2020", for the required limits.
For the amount of coverage, specific type of coverage and how to submit that information, the contractor must coordinate with the Railroad.
Response posted 01/22/2021
Inquiry #33: This is a follow up to Inquiry #14 requesting a time extension to submit bids. There are still several outstanding inquiries and another forthcoming addenda. This is also a more complicated project than the other District 8 project (08-1C0824). We request a minimum 2 week bid date extension to allow bidders enough time to analyze quantities and required work per stage, sourcing for aggregates due to the Pavement Climate Region, and to provide the Department with competitive pricing.
Inquiry submitted 01/25/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/27/2021
Response #2:Please refer to addendum No.5
Response posted 02/04/2021
Inquiry #34: Addendum 3 added a list of items to Standard Spec section 52-2.02A(1) which gives direction on what locations/scopes require epoxy coated reinforcement, when they are located in a freeze-thaw area. Standard Specification 1-1.09 reads that freeze-thaw areas will be identified in the Special Provisions. Special Provision 1-1.09 still reads that only the West Hesperia Overhead is in a freeze-thaw area. Please clarify whether Standard Spec 52-2.02A(1) and Special Provision 52-2.02A(1) only apply to West Hesperia Overhead or the entire project.
Inquiry submitted 01/27/2021
Response #1:An addendum is being prepared to address the concerns.
Response posted 01/27/2021
Inquiry #35: Per Standard Spec 83-3.02(1) in freeze-thaw areas concrete barriers require 675lbs of cementitious material. Please clarify that all barriers on the project will have this requirement.
Inquiry submitted 01/27/2021
Response #1:An addendum is being prepared to address the concerns.
Response posted 01/27/2021
Inquiry #36: Special Provisions Section 40-6 includes specifications for constructing Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement with Intermediate Strength Concrete (JPCP-ISC). Neither the standard specifications nor the revised standard specifications includes section 40-6. Please provide the missing information
Inquiry submitted 01/28/2021
Response #1:Per SSP 40-6, JPCP-ISC = JPCP. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 01/28/2021
Inquiry #37: Construction detail C-88 show the details for the 60 Mod MC. The footing is not shown in the cross sections nor the XLM files. How is the excavation and backfill paid for.
Inquiry submitted 01/28/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/28/2021
Response #2:Please refer to section 83-1 of the standard specifications. Bid per current contract documents
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #38: The bid quantity for bid item 59 Joint Seal (Preformed Compression) is grossly overstated versus our takeoff quantity. Please correct the quantities for bid item 59 so all bidders are bidding the correct quantity.
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/29/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #39: Due to the duration of the project and enormous quantity for Item 34 - Treated Wood Waste. Please provide breakdown/separate quantities for TWW removed from guardrail and roadside sign. Thanks
Inquiry submitted 02/02/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/03/2021
Response #2:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #40: Re: Inquiry #21: I am the one who submitted the information and pricing for the Armorguard Barrier to the Design Engineer at the planning stage of this project. At that time, I was told to submit information and pricing for a 56+/- LF opening. This is the information and pricing that is contained in the Special Provisions Section 12. I am now being told that the opening is going to be 100 LF per the drawings. This will obviously require additional Armorguard per location, which will drastically alter the rental pricing. Also, if 4 pieces of Armoguard are used at each location, then the opening would need to be 115+/- LF. Do I need to adjust pricing to use 4 pieces of Armorguard at each location?
Inquiry submitted 02/02/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/03/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #41: For bid item 119 Fence Removal, will security need to be maintained? If so will there be a temp fence bid item added so the permanent fence can be constructed?
Inquiry submitted 02/03/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #42: Previous Caltrans bids have allowed both Spiralwound Pipeliner and Cured-In-Place Pipeliner (CIPP) as alternate methods to rehabilitate the designated drainage structures. Can CIPP added as an alternate on this project for Bid Items #98-102? This will allow for increased contractor participation and the most competitive pipelining number.
Inquiry submitted 02/04/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 03/03/2021
Inquiry #43: Reference Bid Item 34, Treated wood waste. Treated wood waste is currently classified as Class 1 Hazardous waste by the Department of Toxic Substance Control. Beginning on February 16, 2021, DTSC will allow interested parties to apply for a variance from certain provisions of law relating to the management of treated wood waste. Will Caltrans apply for the variance allowing the treated wood waste to be classified as Class 3 hazardous material.
Inquiry submitted 02/04/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:Caltrans will not apply for the variance. It should be disposed to Class I facility. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 02/09/2021
Inquiry #44: Is there any chance that Caltrans would consider changing (Line Items 154-157) METHYL METHACRYLATE PAINT Traffic Stripe and Pavement Marking to PAINT (2-COAT), TAPE OR THERMOPLASTIC. This would allow more competitive bidding from Striping Subcontractors as there currently are no contractors in California that have a truck for MMA PAINT STRIPE.
Inquiry submitted 02/05/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 02/09/2021
Inquiry #45: In response to Inquiry #44... This inquiry states inaccurate information. There are contractors, both in California and others that service the California market, that have the equipment and experience to apply MMA Stripes. Recent bid results on other CalTrans projects will confirm this with competitive bidding by various contractors.
Inquiry submitted 02/08/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/09/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 03/03/2021
Inquiry #46: Please clarify if Bid Item No. 104 (Concrete Channel Lining) requires epoxy coated Rebar and Welded Wire Fabric (WWF). NOTE: It’s is nearly impossible, based on past experience, to find a supplier which can provide epoxy coated WWF.
Inquiry submitted 02/09/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/10/2021
Response #2:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #47: Please advise, the addendum information page shows 10 Addendums. Looks to be duplicates.
Also, two(2) CalTrans Projects 08-0K1224 are showing at this time.
Inquiry submitted 02/11/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/11/2021
Response #2:The duplicate copy has been deleted.
Response posted 03/03/2021
Inquiry #48: Since this project was postponed for a couple of months, will an additional mandatory pre-bid meeting be held?
Inquiry submitted 02/11/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/11/2021
Response #2:No additional mandatory pre-bid meeting will be held.
Response posted 02/12/2021
Inquiry #49: Due to the sizable amount of k-rail needed for this project, will Mash Rated K-rail be required?
Inquiry submitted 02/16/2021
Response #1:The Zone Guard, J-J Hooks (anticipated to be approved next month) and any other MASH compliant barrier will be allowed in lieu of k-rail.
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #50: As a follow up to the response for inquiry #49, when you say "any other MASH compliant barrier will be allowed in lieu of k-rail" do you mean any other barrier listed on Caltrans list of MASH approved barriers or any other MASH compliant barrier listed in any other state or with the FHWA?
Inquiry submitted 03/19/2021
Response #1:Caltrans list of MASH approved barriers. Please refer to https://dot.ca.gov/programs/safety-programs/mash
Response posted 03/23/2021
Inquiry #51: Regarding inquiry # 49 Temporary K Rail you state "The Zone Guard, J-J Hooks (anticipated to be approved next month) and any other MASH compliant barrier will be allowed in lieu of k-rail." By "and any other MASH compliant barrier" do you mean any other states MASH compliant barrier or any other Caltrans MASH compliant barrier?
Inquiry submitted 03/23/2021
Response #1:Please see response to Bidder Inquiry #50.
Response posted 03/23/2021
Inquiry #52: Has the AASHTO M-326 culvert rehabilitation method been considered for this project for bid items 98, 99, 100, 101, 103?
Inquiry submitted 03/25/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 03/26/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 04/08/2021
Inquiry #53: When do you anticipate addendum 6 to be released?
Inquiry submitted 03/26/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 03/26/2021
Response #2:The inquiry is currently being reviewed.
Response posted 04/01/2021
Response #3:Addendum 6 is anticipated 4/9/21.
Response posted 04/09/2021
Inquiry #54: Addendum 5, issued on 2/4/21, stated “An addendum will follow advising you of the additional changesâ€, however, to date no additional addenda have been issued. Please confirm when Addendum 6 will be issued and if the bid date will be revised.
Inquiry submitted 04/06/2021
Response #1:Addendum #6 will be issued this week with a revised bid opening date.
Response posted 04/07/2021
Inquiry #55: If this project is being postponed again all bidders should be made aware as soon as possible. Is this project being postponed again?
Inquiry submitted 04/07/2021
Response #1:Refer to response for inquiry #54
Response posted 04/07/2021
Inquiry #56: Regarding Drain 99 approximately 1052' of double barrel 24". The Spiral Wound liner may not be able to go this entire distance due to material constraints, only so much profile can get onto the spool. If not possible will Caltrans consider alternatives?
Inquiry submitted 04/09/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 04/09/2021
Response #2:The length of 1052' is the total length for double barrel. Each barrel has a length of 526-feet.
Response posted 05/05/2021
Inquiry #57: On DQ-16 table for Machine Spiral Wound Pipeliner, there is a column for "culvert Slurry-cement backfill." Is this item for filling voids in the pipe prior to the lining? How was this item calculated? Does Caltrans have existing CCTV they could provide?
Inquiry submitted 04/09/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 04/09/2021
Response #2:This is the item for filling the annular space between the pipeliner and the culvert. Item was calculated by determining volume between pipeliner and corrugations of CSP.
No CCTV information is available. Bid per current contract documents
Response posted 05/05/2021
Inquiry #58: Just following up on Inquiry #39 for Item 34 - Treated Wood Waste. Please provide breakdown for TWW removed from guardrail and roadside signs. Thanks
Inquiry submitted 04/09/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 04/09/2021
Response #2:Quantity breakdown will be addressed in a future addendum.
Response posted 04/09/2021
Inquiry #59: Has AASHTO M 326 method been considered for bid items 98-101?
Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 04/29/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 04/30/2021
Response #2:Refer to standard specifications 71-3.09. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/04/2021
Inquiry #60: Inquiry Response 17 confirms the classification of High Desert Climate Region. No doubt the majority of the project falls within this climate region; Under section 40-1.02B(3), High Desert requires 25% loss under California Test 211 (LA Rattler); However, the LA Rattler loss of 25% is more geared toward severe climate regions in Northern California where chains are required during winter months. The project limits DO NOT require chains on vehicles and thus the pavement degradation will not occur. The stringent 25% loss has no added benefit and will preclude several local aggregate suppliers. This will significantly drive up cost for trucking concrete aggregates from out of the county, aggregates will be listed at a premium price due to the specifications, all for no benefit of the pavement’s lifespan or durability. Please update project’s special provisions to require 40% loss in lieu of 25% under section 40-1.02B(3) Aggregate.
Inquiry submitted 06/23/2021
Response #1:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 06/28/2021
Inquiry #61: As of this week, the bid date of 8/5 is currently 6-weeks out which is consistent with a typical Caltrans bid period. Please confirm that the 8/5 bid date will hold before the contracting community commits bidding resources.
Thank you
Inquiry submitted 06/25/2021
Response #1:Bid opening date is 8/5/21.
Response posted 06/28/2021
Inquiry #62: Per addendum # 7 the Methyl Methacrylate traffic striping was changed to two-component. The addendum # 7 specification does not specify which two-component paint to utilize for installation of bid items 172-175. Does Caltrans want the standard fast curing Epoxy traffic paint as listed on the AML? or the very fast curing Polyurea traffic paint as listed on the AML?. Please provide clarification and thank you for your time.
Inquiry submitted 07/12/2021
Response #1:Refer to standard specification 84-2.02F Two-component Painted Traffic Stripes and Pavement Markings and standard specifications 84-2.02 Materials. Contractor is to follow the manufacturer installation guidance.
Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 07/14/2021
Inquiry #63: Inquiry #60 requested that the State would update the project’s special provisions to require 40% loss in lieu of 25% under section 40-1.02B(3) Aggregate. The addendum did not specifically address this question.
Will the state confirm that 40% loss is acceptable under section 40-1.02B(3) Aggregate?
Inquiry submitted 07/12/2021
Response #1:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 07/14/2021
Inquiry #64: 1. Can Caltrans provide a contact for the railroad? Inquiry #32 requested we contact the railroad with regard to insurance limits.
2. Considering the major staging changes and change to contract time in Addendum 7, we would like to request an additional four (4) weeks of time for bidding this project?
Inquiry submitted 07/12/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 07/14/2021
Response #2:For Q1, Contact information: Nick Vineyard - nvineya@upcontractor.up.com
Response posted 07/16/2021
Inquiry #65: Due to the significant changes issued in Addendum 7, we respectfully request that the bid date be extended a minimum of four weeks to allow sufficient time for Prime Contractors and subcontractors, including DBEs, to provide complete and competitive estimates.
Inquiry submitted 07/12/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 07/14/2021
Inquiry #66: Please confirm that Caltrans position on the Pavement Climate Region is still "High Desert" which will require significant additional cost to haul aggregates for the concrete pavements.
Pursuant to Addendum 7, the project is in a freeze thaw environment which does not require the stringent requirements for aggregate conformance as does the "High Desert" climate requirements.
Inquiry submitted 07/14/2021
Response #1:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 07/15/2021
Inquiry #67: We would like to request a 3 to 4 week minimum time extension to the bid date to properly evaluate the extensive phasing changes made in addendum 7 and provide adequate time to subcontractors and suppliers to provide Caltrans a competitive bid.
Inquiry submitted 07/14/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 07/15/2021
Inquiry #68: K-Rail placement for stages 2A and Stage 4 as indicated in the traffic handling plans doesn't allow for JPCP in lane 1 to be completed in a full lane width. Please confirm that Caltrans will allow for a longitudinal construction joint in lane 1 both north bound and south bound.
Inquiry submitted 07/15/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 07/16/2021
Response #2:Adding a longitudinal construction joint is allowed. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 07/23/2021
Inquiry #69: As a result of the changes that have been incorporated into the bid documents, we request that the bid date be extended by two weeks.
Inquiry submitted 07/16/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents
Response posted 07/19/2021
Inquiry #70: Detail 1 on sheet 776 is incomplete. Please provide more detail on what is expected on Stage 4 construction i.e. transitioning from temporary median paving to permanent median construction as shown on typical cross-sections.
Inquiry submitted 07/16/2021
Response #1:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 07/19/2021
Inquiry #71: Stage 1 construction details call for an outside shoulder strengthening with mill & overlay 0.25' (T5). However, on sheet THQ-2, it eludes that the outside 2' of the shoulder widening is to be constructed with a T1 section. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 07/16/2021
Response #1:The 2ft Outside Shld Widening on THQ-2 is additional 2 feet of widening that is adjacent to the outside existing AC shoulder strengthening that has T5 mill and overlay. Location of placement of additional 2ft widening is per the table, range and direction provided.
Before actual stage 1 construction and lane shifting, cold plane 2inch of exist outside AC shoulder per SC sheets, place additional 2ft of outside shoulder widening per quantity table.
Overlay the top 2inch of AC last for smooth transition on both existing milled shoulder and 2ft widening.
Response posted 07/20/2021
Inquiry #72: Please confirm sheet Q-7 quantity of 'Concrete Barrier (Type 60MF)' LF (Sheet No. L-14 and L-16, as changed per Addendum 7).
Inquiry submitted 07/16/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents
Response posted 07/22/2021
Inquiry #73: Per Adn-7, TH-1 shows postmile start / finish limits for sections T1, T2, T3. These limits do not match stations and cross sections shown in the TH plans. Please provide stations and/or updated postmile markers for T1, T2, and T3.
Inquiry submitted 07/16/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents
Response posted 07/22/2021
Inquiry #74: In review of the adn-7 plans, it appears that temporary lighting is based on previous staging. Please provide current staging for electrical items.
Inquiry submitted 07/20/2021
Response #1:The issue will be addressed in an upcoming addendum
Response posted 07/21/2021
Inquiry #75: Item # 171 - Item Code 665717: 18" Slotted Corrugated Steel Pipe (0.79" Thick). Can you confirm the grate height?
Inquiry submitted 07/22/2021
Response #1:Grate height = 6 inches
Response posted 07/22/2021
Inquiry #76: Due to the extensive changes made in Addendum No. 7 that changed how the project is to be built and the additional changes made in Addendum No. 8, we are requesting a bid extension of a minimum of 2 weeks. Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 07/22/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents
Response posted 07/23/2021
Inquiry #77: Adn-8 sheet THQ-2 quantities appear to adjust quantities for bid items 12, 17, 19, Please advise.
Inquiry submitted 07/22/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 07/23/2021
Inquiry #78: Following the previous inquiry #68, does Caltrans intend to issue a subsequent addendum to address the full-width construction for lane #1 NB and SB? If not, please provide details for the longitudinal construction joint.
Inquiry submitted 07/22/2021
Response #1:Refer to response for bidder inquiry #68. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 07/23/2021
Inquiry #79: Per addendum 8, there are now duplicate details for the ARMORGUARD TEMPORARY BARRIER SYSTEM on sheets 904 and 905. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 07/22/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 07/27/2021
Inquiry #80: Does Cal-Trans have the quantity of K-Rail left in place from previous phases? It is difficult to differentiate the symbols.
Inquiry submitted 07/23/2021
Response #1:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 07/27/2021
Inquiry #81: Due to the amount of changes with this project, Can the GFE back up documentation be submitted on a thumb drive instead of printed out? Having the option of all back up documentation on a thumb drive would help save on paper and benefit the agency on not having to store thousands of papers.
Inquiry submitted 07/23/2021
Response #1:At this time, Caltrans does not take thumb drives or any electronic formats for post bid submittals. Thanks
Response posted 07/26/2021
Inquiry #82: Due to the extensive Staging changes, please extend the bid 2-3 weeks.
Inquiry submitted 07/23/2021
Response #1:Your inquiry is being reviewed.
Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents
Response posted 07/26/2021
Inquiry #83: Inquiry Response 18 confirms that HMA should be produced using lime slurry marination. District 8 has allowed projects without lime, with dry lime, and some with lime slurry marination. However, lime slurry marination is usually only required where aggregates have severe bonding issues with binder. The project area doesn’t seem to have such bad aggregates that lime slurry marination would be required (see past projects that didn’t require any lime). The Superpave specification was written to not mandate LAS or Lime and have the HMA producer check the aggregates to meet the P.I. spec and then test for TSR and meet the 70 ratio. Mandating lime slurry marination will significantly drive-up cost for the HMA without adding benefit of the pavement’s lifespan. Allow the HMA producer to meet the 70 TSR requirement with no additive, LAS, and/or dry lime under section 39-2.01B(2)(b).
Inquiry submitted 07/26/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 07/26/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents
Response posted 07/29/2021
Inquiry #84: On THQ-2 for the Temp Misc Traffic Item quantity chart, for the Temp Pvmt - Median and Shoulders, there is 1.8 million SF of paving area, 14,993 tons of HMA and 202,659 SY of Cold Plane AC Pvmt shown to be completed in Stage 4. Per the Stage 4 plans (SC-43 to SC-48) the Permanent Pavement is to be constructed in the median, no temporary pavement. Please clarify where the significant amount of Temp Cold Plane and AC Paving is to be completed in Stage 4 based on the quantities shown on THQ-2.
Inquiry submitted 07/26/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 07/26/2021
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/10/2021
Inquiry #85: Item #79 is a bore and jack. There is not a specification section for this in the specifications for this project.
Inquiry submitted 07/27/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 07/29/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 08/16/2021
Inquiry #86: With reference to questions #10; #17; #60: #63; and #66; we have the following concerns and questions:
1. Addendum #8; plan sheet X-1 states the Pavement Climate Region to be:
1. South Mountain (PM R28.6 to 31.68)
2. Desert (PM 31.68 to 37.5)
Standard Specifications Section 90-1.02C(2) Coarse Aggregate; states that CT Test
#211 % loss be less than 45.
Standard Specifications Section 40-1.02B(3) states the coarse aggregate in High
Desert and High Mountain climate regions, the loss must not exceed 25%
Is there a difference between Desert and High Desert for CT Test 211 to be less than
25% loss.
For South Mountain Climate Region; should the CT Test 211 be less than 45%
What does Caltrans want for the coarse aggregates to be; 25% loss or 45% loss?
2. With reference to Standard Specifications Section 40-1.02B(4); what % of air
entrainment are we to use for Desert Climate Region?
It states 6% for HIGH DESERT only.
3. Addendum #9 states that another addendum is forthcoming with additional
changes. We request that the bid date be extended an additional 2 weeks from
the issued addendum #10 to analyze the changes.
Inquiry submitted 07/28/2021
Response #1:SUbmitted for consideration
Response posted 07/29/2021
Response #2:1. For the coarse aggregates, 45% loss (max) in LA rattler Test in Desert and South Mountain Climate Region.
2. Per Standard Specifications Section 40-1.02B(4), for South Mountain Climate Region, 4.0% (within ±1.5%) of air
Entrainment and for Desert Climate Region, the air content must be within ±1.5% of the value used in the approved mix design.
3. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/03/2021
Inquiry #87: 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 07/30/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 08/02/2021
Response #2:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/06/2021
Inquiry #88: Will the State please answer if this project is designated at Freeze-Thaw or not. Please clarify Yes or No.
Does the Concrete barrier rail require epoxy coated rebar? Adjoining projects have not required epoxy coated rebar and/or freeze-thaw mix designs. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 08/02/2021
Response #1:Yes, refer to addendum 7, special provisions 1-1.09.
Yes, project is within freeze-thaw area and requires epoxy. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/03/2021
Inquiry #89: Bid Item 144 - Type 60MF Barrier has a new pay quantity of 750' per addendum 7. We believe this is a mistake and the correct quantity should be 486'. The state typically pays this from one station to the next. If you look on sheet 1032 (Q-7) it shows three locations
230+08.27 - 231+47.97 (140') not the 280' shown
257+07.70 - 258+28.37 (121') not the 242' shown
345+71.28 - 347.95.57 (225') this is correct
140' + 121' + 225' = 486'
Please revise Bid Item 144 to reflect the correct quantity of 486'
Inquiry submitted 08/05/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 08/05/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 08/16/2021
Inquiry #90: Bid Inquiry #88 Confirms that all Type 60 Barrier will require epoxy coated steel because the project is in a Freeze-thaw are. Could the State please give clear direction on the color required. Will this project be Green or Purple Epoxy Coated Rebar?
Inquiry submitted 08/05/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 08/06/2021
Response #2:Refer to Caltrans Standard Specifications section 52-2.02B. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/12/2021
Inquiry #91: Will there be documents posted for addendum #10?
Inquiry submitted 08/16/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 08/16/2021
Response #2:Yes, documents will soon be posted for Addendum No. 10.
Response posted 08/16/2021
Response #3:Documents will soon be posted for addendum No. 11, addendum No. 10 just posted regarding federal wage modification.
Response posted 08/17/2021
Inquiry #92: For the Armorguard Temporary Barrier System shown on THD-1 & -2, is the Contractor to pour a concrete end anchorage pad under the temporary k-rail in order to install the anchors per the details?
Inquiry submitted 08/18/2021
Response #1:Yes. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/20/2021
Inquiry #93: We were notified that Addendum 11 has been issued. When will the link for this Addendum and Addendum 10 be made available?
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2021
Response #1:addendum 10 and 11 are posted at link below and available to download.
http://ppmoe.dot.ca.gov/des/oe/weekly-ads/oe-project.php?q=08-0K1224
Response posted 08/20/2021
Inquiry #94: Addendum 11 added bid item 182 (48" RCP Trenchless - 260 LF), however bid item 77 (48" RCP) was not reduced by 260 LF. Please advise or confirm a new bid schedule will be issued prior to bid.
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2021
Response #1:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/20/2021
Inquiry #95: When will the documents for addendum # 11 be posted?
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2021
Response #1:Adendum 11 are posted at link below and available to download.
http://ppmoe.dot.ca.gov/des/oe/weekly-ads/oe-project.php?q=08-0K1224
Response posted 08/20/2021
Inquiry #96: Page 186 of 226 of the Revised Standard Specifications states:
"Replace the 3rd paragraph of section 87-1.03B(3)(a) with:
Place a minimum of 2 inches of sand bedding in a trench before installing the conduit and 18 inches of slurry cement over the conduit before placing additional backfill material,"
Can Caltrans please confirm that this is for ALL conduit or only for Type 3 conduit.
Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2021
Response #1:Yes, this is for all conduit.
Response posted 08/20/2021
Inquiry #97: Can Caltrans please confirm that all electrical pull boxes designated with a "T" will solely be a Traffic Pull box and that no "TR" Tamper Resistant Pull boxes will be required on this project. Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2021
Response #1:Electrical pull boxes designated with a "T" will solely be a Traffic Pull box and no "TR" Tamper Resistant Pull boxes will be required on this project.
Response posted 08/20/2021
Inquiry #98: On sheet 1147 of 1276, E-70 Modifying Lighting Systems, Addendum NO. 8 dated July 22, 2021 do not match the Electrical System quantities per sheet 1207 of 1276, Addendum No. 8 dated July 22, 2021.
On sheet sheet E-70, 1147 of 1276, Addendum 8 dated July 22, 2021 there's two type 30 standards and five 5T boxes. These quantities are different from the Electrical System quantities per sheet 1207 of 1276, Addendum No. 8 dated July 22, 2021 listing four type 30 lighting standards and ten 5T boxes listed.
These quantities four type 30 stand and ten 5T boxes are the same on the original bid book sheet E-70 page 1147 of 1276
Please clarify
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/24/2021
Inquiry #99: Will Caltrans accept the use of (WxLxH) 2'x2'x5' PCC Blocks - 4 EA & 1'X1'X5' PCC Blocks per each temporary lighting standard in lieu of stacked concrete deadman weights shown on ED-12 (Sheet 1205B of 1276) .
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/23/2021
Inquiry #100: Sheet E-35 between Stations 269+20 to 271+80 the note states "Existing 2"C 2#8 and 1#8" but the graphic shows bolded which typically means new. Is the contractor to proceed with the note since it supersedes the graphics?
This also occurs on Sheet E-35 between stations 229+00 to 330+80.
Can Caltrans please provide clarity on these discrepancies. Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2021
Response #1:Refer to the notes on the referenced plans sheets.
Response posted 08/23/2021
Inquiry #101: Per inquiry #96 all conduit is to have 18" of slurry, but ED-6 (Sheet 1201 of 1276) only shows 6" of sand required for the fiber optic conduit installation.
Can Caltrans clarify whether slurry will be required for the Fiber Optic Conduit as well, as it is not shown in the electrical details. Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 08/22/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/23/2021
Inquiry #102: Will MOH be accepted for this project?
Inquiry submitted 08/23/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/24/2021
Inquiry #103: Following up on previous inquiries #39&58. Will there not be a breakdown provided?
Inquiry submitted 08/24/2021
Response #1:Please bid per current contract documents
Response posted 08/24/2021
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.