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 08-1C0824
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: We would like to request that the CAD drawing files be made available as soon as possible to assist in our quantity takeoff efforts.
Inquiry submitted 12/08/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 12/08/2020
Response #2:Please go to the Caltrans Bidding Website for the information.
Response posted 12/09/2020
Inquiry #2: Will the state consider moving the bid date back a few weeks for this project. More time is needed to prepare for this bid due to its size and another large and similar project (08-0K1224) bidding the same week. Giving more time will definitely result in more competitive bidding.
Inquiry submitted 12/17/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 12/17/2020
Response #2:Your concern is being addressed and depending on issues surfacing between both contracts, a decision will be made to adjust the bid opening date for one or both projects early in the New Year. Please continue to bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 12/18/2020
Inquiry #3: Please provide cross sections for stations roughly from 5548+50 thru 5599+50. Cross sections titled XSection A LineA-501B were duplicated with XSection A Line A-502A.
Inquiry submitted 12/17/2020
Response #1:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 12/22/2020
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #1
Response posted 01/05/2021
Inquiry #4: Sheet 382 shows extensive work on both sides of Rice Road / Route 177. Please provide the TH plans for this street.
Inquiry submitted 12/18/2020
Response #1:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 12/22/2020
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #1
Response posted 01/05/2021
Inquiry #5: Section 12-4.02C(3)(g) of the Special Provisions does not include hours to close Rice Road / Route 177. The street will need to be closed for bridge demo and falsework operations and potentially partial closures for the bridge widening’s bent work. Please provide the lane closure and full hours for this street. Please also provide a detour plan for the public traffic when this road is closed.
Inquiry submitted 12/18/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 12/23/2020
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #1
Response posted 01/05/2021
Inquiry #6: SECTION 39-2.01B (2)(b) OF THE SPECIAL PROVISIONS (PAGE 66) FOR THIS CONTRACT STATES:
“Treat aggregate with lime slurry with marinationâ€
However, Section 39-2.01B (2)(b) Mix Design of the 2018 Standard Specifications states:
“If the plasticity index is less than 4, treat the aggregate blend with dry lime or lime slurry with marination or treat the HMA with liquid antistripâ€.
The plasticity index of the aggregate blend which would be utilized from our aggregate source is (0) zero. Our hot mix asphalt facilities have supplied hundreds of thousands of tons of hot mix asphalt on projects located in Caltrans District 11, utilizing the dry lime treatment method. All specification requirements set forth in Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 39, have been fully compliant for all hot mix asphalt supplied on these Caltrans District 11 projects.
Caltrans District 8 recently bid and awarded a project, Caltrans Contract No. 08-1F13U4 on Rtes. 62 and 95, which did not exclusively require a lime slurry with marination, but referred to the Caltrans Standard Specification language referenced above.
In addition to a dry lime treatment of aggregate being a much more cost effective approach for Caltrans to utilize, there are serious environmental consequences for Caltrans to consider if only a lime slurry with marination is required.
Does Caltrans have a blanket waiver from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board to allow for lime marination relative to permeation of the lime slurry liquid into any substrata of soil or into the water table?
These problems are averted by the use of the dry lime method i.e. lime is incorporated into the aggregate composition with no exposure to the ground surface.
In summary, the Bidder Inquiry is:
Will the dry lime treatment of aggregate be allowed on this project in lieu of lime slurry with marination if the plasticity index of the aggregate is zero?
Inquiry submitted 12/23/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consdieration
Response posted 12/24/2020
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 01/06/2021
Response #3:Please bid per the current contract documents
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #7: If available, please provide bridge as-builts.
Inquiry submitted 12/31/2020
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/04/2021
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 01/05/2021
Response #3:Please refer to section 2-1.06B Supplemental Project Information in the 2018 STANDARD SPECIFICATION
Response posted 01/07/2021
Inquiry #8: The "QUANTITIES" summary for each bridge location is missing from the first page of each bridge. This is usually one the first page of each bridge locations corresponding plans. Will the state correct this and add the Quantities summary information for each bridge?
Inquiry submitted 01/04/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/04/2021
Response #2:Yes, The issue will be addressed by upcoming addendum.
Response posted 01/04/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #2.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #9: Reference Inquiry #1. The CAD files provided included surface data, OG data and X-Sections. Would it be possible to have line work for edge of pavement, staging limits, removals, etc. included in the CAD drawing files?
Inquiry submitted 01/04/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/05/2021
Response #2:Please bid per contract documents.
Response posted 01/05/2021
Inquiry #10: Sheet 1368 indicates 1-1/2†joint seal to be placed at the hinge in Teed Ditch. There is no bid item for 1-1/2†Joint Seal. Please clarify which size joint seal is required at this hinge.
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 01/11/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #2.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Response #4:Refer to plan sheet 1360 of 1660 and Item 193 on the Bid Item List in Addendum #2, dated January 14, 2021.
Response posted 02/11/2021
Inquiry #11: Reference Addendum No. 1. Bid Item 191 - Structure Backfill was added with a quantity of 133,000 CY. Plan sheet 589 was updated and added a column for Structure Backfill with a total quantity of 34,054 CY. Please confirm whether the bid item quantity or the plan sheet quantity is correct. If the bid item quantity is correct, please provide details that identify where the additional structure backfill is located.
Inquiry submitted 01/06/2021
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 refer to Addendum #2.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #12: Will the Nesting Bird/Burrowing Owl Plan (identified in the Information Handout) be released as an addendum?
Inquiry submitted 01/06/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/07/2021
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 01/11/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #13: Per Section 8.9 of the 2081 Permit (Desert Tortoise ITP), will Caltrans provide the Desert Tortoise Relocation Plan? If not, will the CSB be responsible for producing this document?
Inquiry submitted 01/07/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/07/2021
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 01/11/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #14: Will Caltrans provide the Attachments associated with the Desert Tortoise Incidental Take Permit for this project?
Inquiry submitted 01/07/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/07/2021
Response #2:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/08/2021
Response #3:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/08/2021
Response #4:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/11/2021
Response #5: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 #6:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/11/2021
Response #7:please bid per the current contract bid documents
Response posted 01/13/2021
Response #8:Please refer to Addendum #2.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #15: This is a follow up to inquiry number two. Has it been decided yet if this contract or 08-0K1224 will be postponed? Due to the size and similarity between the two projects, giving more time between will definitely allow more competitive bids.
Inquiry submitted 01/08/2021
Response #1:Your request is being evaluated in light of both projects with almost consecutive bid opening dates in one week. The issue of which one qualifies for the bid opening delay depends on several factors currently under evaluation. An addendum will be issued in approximately one week from now
Response posted 01/11/2021
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2.
Response posted 01/14/2021
Inquiry #16: Copa, Aztec, Tarantula, Sutro, and Alta Ditches all have existing slope paving that will need to be removed in order to install the eastern abutments and eastern most bents of the right bridges as shown on Sheets 1387, 1489, 1501, 1513, and 1525. These plan sheets indicate via the notes that the concrete slope paving is to be replaced with Rock Slope Protection. Sheets 521, 525, 527, 529, and 530 appear to show the concrete slope protection reinstalled. Please provide the following: 1) Drawings showing the extent of the existing slope paving. The as-builts provided to us by the Public Records Center do not show this slope paving. 2) Method of payment for slope paving removal. A bid item with item code 720008 is not included in the bid items. 3) Clarification between the structure plans and the drainage plans as to whether the concrete rock slope protection is to be reinstalled or new rock slope protection is to be installed. 4) Please indicate which pay item(s) the replacement work is to be performed under.
Inquiry submitted 01/13/2021
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 01/14/2021
Inquiry #17: In the areas where the pavement is called out to be Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement, please clarify if the adjacent outside concrete shoulder is also to be Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement or Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement.
Inquiry submitted 01/14/2021
Response #1:In the areas where the pavement is called out to be Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement, the adjacent outside concrete shoulder is also to be the Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement.
Response posted 01/15/2021
Inquiry #18: Section 72-3.02C Rock, says the rocks are to comply with the gradation shown on the following table. The table does not provide information for Bid Items 133 (4T, CL XI), 134 (2T, CL IX) or 135 (1T, CL VIII), please provide direction if bidder is to use gradations shown in 72-2.02B Rock.
Inquiry submitted 01/15/2021
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 01/19/2021
Inquiry #19: Section 72-3.03D Placing Weep Tubes, Are Weep tubes required? If so, please provide the layout or spacing requirements.
Inquiry submitted 01/15/2021
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 01/19/2021
Inquiry #20: Section 72-3.03E Placing Concrete: Please provide the Minimum Concrete Penetration Required for Bid Items 133 (4T, CL XI), 134 (2T, CL IX) or 135 (1T, CL VIII).
Inquiry submitted 01/15/2021
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 01/19/2021
Inquiry #21: Will there be any paint, stain, or graffiti coating requirements for the concrete structures on this project?
Inquiry submitted 01/21/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/22/2021
Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents
Response posted 01/26/2021
Inquiry #22: Refer to section 12.3.20 Type K Temporary Railing. The substantial amount of Type K railing required for the project is more than is commercially available in the market. Please allow the use of approved temporary railing from neighboring states.
Inquiry submitted 01/25/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/25/2021
Response #2:Section 12.3.20 in Standard Specifications does not require Type K Temporary Railing must be from California. Please refer to Section 6 Control of Materials for more information.
Response posted 01/25/2021
Response #3: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 02/12/2021
Inquiry #23: Please clarify the intent of the column titled "Joint Filler (N)" shown on plan sheets 1280 through 1295. Many recent Caltrans projects have eliminated the sealing of the joints in the new Concrete Pavement. We will assume that because there is not a Joint Seal bid item (Item Code 414200, 414201, or 414202) the contraction joints in the JPCP and CRCP will not be widened and sealed on this project. If it is the intent to seal the contraction joints, please add a bid item for this work that will define whether the seal is to be Asphalt Rubber, Silicone, or Preformed Compression as shown on standard plan P20.
Inquiry submitted 01/25/2021
Response #1:The contraction joints will not be sealed so there is no need for a second saw-cut to create the joint reservoir. Instead, they will be filled with the non-standard material specified under Section 40-1.02E.
Response posted 01/27/2021
Inquiry #24: Is the NES available?
Inquiry submitted 01/26/2021
Response #1:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 01/27/2021
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #25: There may be a discrepancy on Bid Item 72 Item Code 490603 24" Cast-In-Drilled-Hole Concrete Piling with an Estimated Quantity of 2,135 LF. Please confirm these values.
Inquiry submitted 01/26/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/27/2021
Response #2:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 02/03/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #4:Refer to plan sheet 1360 of 1660 and Item 72 in the Bid Item List in Addendum #3, dated February 5, 2021.
Response posted 02/11/2021
Inquiry #26: Please clarify the intent of the column titled "Joint Filler (N)" shown on plan sheets 1280 through 1295. Many recent Caltrans projects have eliminated the sealing of the joints in the new Concrete Pavement. We will assume that because there is not a Joint Seal bid item (Item Code 414200, 414201, or 414202) the contraction joints in the JPCP and CRCP will not be widened and sealed on this project. If it is the intent to seal the contraction joints, please add a bid item for this work that will define whether the seal is to be Asphalt Rubber, Silicone, or Preformed Compression as shown on standard plan P20.
Inquiry submitted 01/27/2021
Response #1:Same as inquiry #23. Please refer to the response for Inquiry #23
Response posted 01/27/2021
Inquiry #27: Could you please provide a schedule of values for the item Remove Asphalt Concrete Surface and Aggregate Base Approach Slab?
By specification Remove Asphalt Concrete Surface is as follows:
60-3.02C(3) Removing Asphalt Concrete Surfacing Where shown, remove asphalt concrete surfacing and reinforced concrete expansion dams from concrete bridges and approaches. Before removing asphalt concrete surfacing, verify the depth of the surfacing at the supports and midspans of each structure (1) in each shoulder, (2) in the traveled way, and (3) at the roadway crown, if a crown is present. Remove asphalt concrete surfacing by cold milling. At least 1/2 inch of asphalt concrete surfacing must remain after milling activities. Remove the remaining asphalt surfacing using other authorized means. Do not damage the concrete slab.
Would like to verify its location to be sure its not covered in the Roadway Excavation Item.
Inquiry submitted 01/27/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/27/2021
Response #2:Please refer to Remove Asphalt Concrete Surface and Aggregate Base Approach Slab listed in the quantity decals shown on various structure plans in the Addendum #2. Bid per the current contract bid documents
Response posted 02/08/2021
Inquiry #28: Detour Plan DE-1 Sheet #1130 shows the crossover detour section as #4 0.70’ CL2 AB. However the Summary of Quantities Q-10 sheet list a CY volume that would match section #5 1.40’ CL2 AB. Please clarify which section is required for the crossover detours.
Inquiry submitted 01/28/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/28/2021
Response #2:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 01/29/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #29: Reference plan sheet 5. The WB and EB typical cross sections at the top of sheet 5 show structural section 8 with ***. Plan sheet 2 construction notes call out *** is for work between STA 6749+40 to 7052+40. Plan sheets 135 and 137 show structural section 7 for the JPCP (RSC). Per the construction note on plan sheet 2, these locations should be structural section 8. Please confirm whether structural section 7 or 8 is the correct section for the JPCP (RSC) on plan sheets 135 and 137.
Inquiry submitted 01/28/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/29/2021
Response #2:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 01/29/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #30: Reference plan sheets 662 and 702. Note 1 and the Legend on both sheets indicate that the JPCP-RSC pavement can be constructed during a 10 DAY ramp closure. Complete Ramp Closure charts J1 and J2 allow for 10 Hour closures and charts J3 and J4 allow for 55 Hour Weekend Closures. Please confirm that 10 DAY closures are permitted and provide Complete Ramp Closure charts that indicate this.
Inquiry submitted 01/28/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/29/2021
Response #2:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum.
Response posted 02/03/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #31: Drainage Details DD-1 and DD-2, and Notes 1-3 on DD-2: Please clarify the limits for concrete placed within the RSP. Does concrete get placed from Top of RSP to the FG elevation? Or does concrete get placed from Top of RSP to the Toe of RSP? Or does concrete get placed over the entire area of RSP including all slopes and the bottom of the ditches (section C-C, DD-2)?
Inquiry submitted 02/01/2021
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 02/12/2021
Inquiry #32: Regarding the Prime Coat, the spec does not clarify if SC 70 or SC 250 will be used. Can we get clarification on the prime coat oil required for this project?
Inquiry submitted 02/01/2021
Response #1:Please refer to SSP 39-2.01C(3)(c), section 94 of the 2018 Standard Specification and the Revised Standard Specification for the grades of slow-setting asphaltic emulsions.
It's up to the contractor to decide on which grade of slow-setting asphaltic emulsions to use.
Response posted 02/03/2021
Inquiry #33: What type of soil binder is expected for this project?
Inquiry submitted 02/01/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/03/2021
Response #2:Please refer to section 13-5.02E of the 2018 Standard Specifications
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #34: Reference plan sheet 1282. The quantity of 554 CY in the Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement column for STA 5798+59 to 5824+39 appears to be 580% low. In addition, the quantities for all other CRCP entries both EB and WB appear to be 4% high. Overall, we believe that the quantity for BI 68 is approximately 9% low. Please review and confirm.
Inquiry submitted 02/01/2021
Response #1:The quantities for STA 5798+59 to 5824+39 have been adjusted and will be reflected in the upcoming addendum.
Response posted 02/03/2021
Inquiry #35: Has Caltrans obtained a variance from SCAQMD to allow the use of a diesel engine to power the hot plant rather than line power? Has Caltrans obtained a variance to the 12 month time limit on the various locations permit that would allow a portable AC plant to operate for greater than 12 months without obtaining a stationary source permit including performing air emissions modeling and health risk assessment?
Inquiry submitted 02/01/2021
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 continue to bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/11/2021
Inquiry #36: Approximately 75% of the length of this project is an overlay of the existing asphalt roadway with a new PCCP section that is over 1’ higher than the existing roadway. The staging plans require construction of the detour road in Stage 1. This detour road becomes the finish surface of the permanent inside shoulder. Because the asphalt and base sections in the overlay areas are significantly higher than the adjacent existing roadway in Stage 1:
1) Without the future Stage 2/3 concrete to pave against in Stage 1, how can the edge compaction and grade control of the detour (future inside shoulder) paving be made?
2) Once the k-rail is removed prior to stage 2 or 3 construction, the grade difference between the detour road and the existing roadway will caused the newly placed base section to spread out and undermine the new pavement. Will Caltrans consider paying for cement treatment, a concrete “retaining curbâ€, or a thickened edge of asphalt to prevent deterioration of this edge?
Inquiry submitted 02/01/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/03/2021
Response #2:Please bid per the current contract bid documents. It is up to the discretion of the bidder to utilize construction methods and means as deemed necessary to provide proper compaction and grade control .
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #37: Please provide the proposed Structure Concrete, Approach Slab (Type R) standard detail and required slab thickness associated with this bid item.
Inquiry submitted 02/01/2021
Response #1:Please refer to Revised Standard Plan B9-2 and Standard Plan B9-5 as listed on the Structures plans for details of Type R approach slabs. Bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 02/03/2021
Inquiry #38: Staged Construction drawings show new concrete paving placed against new HMA pavement for the detour sections 4 & 5. Typically the concrete paved lanes are constructed first followed by HMA shoulders. Please provide additional details regarding constructing the #1 lane against the HMA shoulder and if this joint will need to be sealed. How will the Contractor be paid to grind and pave the HMA shoulder at this joint (if required) after the concrete paving is constructed?
Inquiry submitted 02/03/2021
Response #1:please bid per the current contract bid documents
Response posted 02/05/2021
Inquiry #39: Reference Bid Item 36, 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:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please continue to bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/10/2021
Response #3:Caltrans will not apply for the variance allowing the treated wood waste to be classified as Class 3 hazardous material. Please continue to bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/11/2021
Inquiry #40: Reference bid item 77, Structural Concrete Approach Slab, Type (N). Please provide details of the existing structural section at all location that receive type (N) approach slabs. Are the existing approaches concrete or a pavement structural section.
Inquiry submitted 02/04/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:The existing structural sections at the locations receiving the Structural Concrete Approach Slabs (N) are all AC pavement. The existing AC pavement structural sections are shown on the Typical Cross Sections sheets.
Response posted 02/08/2021
Inquiry #41: On Sheet SC-33, Stage 2, “A†line, K-Rail is shown with 2 strings in a parallel configuration, with both temporary K-Rail toes set one (1) foot from the traveled way.
A) Does this condition trigger standard plan T3B, “Railing Staking Configuration for Two-Way Traffic†and is it CalTrans intent to stake both rails, with one being staked into new asphalt concrete?
B) To eliminate the pinning requirement can we change the lane configuration from twelve (12) foot to eleven (11) foot widths for the east bound and west bound number 1 lanes on the “A†line?
Inquiry submitted 02/05/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:A) Yes. K-Rail will require staking when set (1) one-foot from the ETW.
B) (12) Twelve foot lanes will be required.
Response posted 02/08/2021
Inquiry #42: On Sheet SC-73, Stage 3, “B†Line, K-Rail is shown to be one (1) and three (3) foot from the traveled way, respectively.
A) Does this trigger standard plan T3B, “Railing Staking Configuration for Two-Way Traffic†and is it CalTrans' intent to stake this rail into the new asphalt concrete?
B) To eliminate the pinning requirement can we change the lane configuration from a twelve (12) foot width to an eleven (11) foot width for the number 1 lane, east bound, on “B†line?
Inquiry submitted 02/05/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:A) Yes. K-Rail will require staking when set (1) one-foot from the ETW.
B) (12) Twelve foot lanes will be required
Response posted 02/08/2021
Inquiry #43: Bid Item 71 Jointed Plane Concrete Pavement (RSC) is being called out for use at the on and off ramps. The closures for the ramps on this project allow 10 days at each location. Caltrans in District 8 is utilizing JPCP-ISC on similar projects and current bids that have the same constraints for closures. The use of JPCP(ISC) in lieu of the JPCP(RSC) will provide a better quality end product, at a lower price and have a longer term life cycle.
Inquiry submitted 02/05/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/05/2021
Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/08/2021
Inquiry #44: Will the state allow a cross over to be added at the mid point of the project? This would allow half the length to be constructed at a time, which would keep traffic in the current configuration for half the project length. The amount of Krail needed would be cut in half and a significant savings realized by the state.
Inquiry submitted 02/08/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/08/2021
Response #2:The bid set package presented a staging plan configuration that can achieve the ultimate final product. However, a stage construction proposal that differs from the current bid set can be explored at the discretion of the RE and contractor. The contractor shall go through normal protocol procedures by submitting plans to the department for approval.
Response posted 02/09/2021
Inquiry #45: Reference special provisions page 49. The second paragraph on this page indicates that "the asbestos survey and sampling report is included in the Information Handout". We do not find this report in the IH. Is asbestos removal anticipated during the bridge removal work? If so, please provide the report and indicate where the removal and handling of the asbestos will be paid.
Inquiry submitted 02/09/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/09/2021
Response #2:This issue will be addressed under an upcoming addendum
Response posted 02/10/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum 5.
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #46: To date the wage general decision number has not been provided. Please provide the wage decision number rates for the project.
Inquiry submitted 02/09/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/09/2021
Response #2:Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please continue to bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/09/2021
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #4.
Response posted 02/16/2021
Inquiry #47: Reference plan sheet 2. Design structural sections 7 and 8 indicate BB between the JPCP (RSC) and the LCBRS lifts. We assume that BB means Bond Breaker. If this is the case, please provide specifications on what type of bond breaker is required. We will assume that a bid item will be added for this work.
Inquiry submitted 02/10/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/11/2021
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum 5.
Response posted 02/19/2021
Inquiry #48: Regarding the vertical joint between the asphalt pavement placed in stage 1 and the new concrete pavement placed in stages 2A and 3A. Will Caltrans require a vertical sawcut of the asphalt to create a smooth surface prior to the new concrete pavement being placed against the asphalt? If so, where will this sawcut be paid?
Inquiry submitted 02/10/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/11/2021
Response #2:Bid per the contract plans. It is up to the discretion of the bidder to utilize construction methods and means deemed necessary to provide a smooth, vertical surface for the final product.
Response posted 02/22/2021
Inquiry #49: Will Diaphragm Abutment Ties be required for Structural Concrete, Approach Slab (Type R)?
Inquiry submitted 02/11/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/12/2021
Response #2:Refer to Revised Standard Plan B9-2 as listed on the structures plans for details of diaphragm abutment ties in the Type R approach slabs. Bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 02/17/2021
Inquiry #50: 1. Please reference page 25 of the supplemental specifications, Section 7-1.02K(6)(j)(iii) regarding Unregulated Earth Material - Three specific PM Locations are identified on the table with a requirement to excavate full depth. Our question is threefold:
a. What are the lengths or limits of work each direction for each PM? Also, is this activity to be interpreted as only within the footprint of the disturbed work zone? Please provide clarification.
b. As almost all of the project is in a fill situation, is this specification requiring us to excavate materials beyond the subgrade depths and “flip†the material to be confined under the proposed paved sections? Please clarify.
c. Historically the contract will include a pay item for this scope of work as “Roadway Excavation (Type xxx) (Aerially Deposited Lead). How will this work be measured and paid for?
Inquiry submitted 02/15/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/18/2021
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 02/24/2021
Inquiry #51: In reference to the Desert Tortoise Translocation Plan:
Will the Contractor-Supplied Biologist be responsible for surveying the two translocation sites identified in the Table 1 (i.e. Recipient Site #1 APN 81120015 and Recipient Site #2 APN 810250012)?
Inquiry submitted 02/15/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/18/2021
Response #2:Caltrans is responsible for the surveys of the translocation sites, not the contractor.
Response posted 02/24/2021
Inquiry #52: Caltrans response to questions #23 and #26 has created some confusion with DBE subcontractors on whether the contraction joints will be filled or sealed. Caltrans response to question #23 is that the joints will NOT be sealed, but filled with a joint filler per 40-1.02E. This task cannot be performed as the material Caltrans is directing for use is a 1/2" wide expansion joint material. The Project Special Provisions 40-4.01A and 40-4.03A do direct the contractor to fill the contraction joints with a joint filler of hot pour asphalt rubber in the non standard joint configuration shown on project plans sheet 385. Will Caltrans be adding a pay item for the over 1.2million feet of contraction joints or will this be paid under the separate bid items 68, 69 70 and 71?
Inquiry submitted 02/17/2021
Response #1:No additional contraction joint pay item will be included in the bid package. The contraction joints should be bid under items 68, 69, 70 and 71.
Response posted 02/18/2021
Inquiry #53: Please clarify if the Method of Test For Flexural Strength Of Concrete (Modulus Of Rupture) California Testing Method issued May of 2020 will be utilized for this project as this method may cause delays in opening age due to the reduction in calculated MOR for concrete pavement.
Inquiry submitted 02/18/2021
Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 02/18/2021
Response #2:Testing of concrete pavement modulus of rupture uses the latest CT 523 published in May 2020. It will not cause any delay in opening age because you will design your concrete mix using the same test method.
Response posted 02/22/2021
Inquiry #54: Approximately 65% of the length of this project is an overlay of the existing asphalt roadway with a new PCCP section that is over 1’ higher than the existing roadway. The staging plans require construction of the detour road in Stage 1. Typically the concrete paved lanes are constructed first followed by HMA shoulders. Because the HMA shoulders are constructed first at a finish elevation of approximately 1’ above existing grade, the aggregate base and asphalt will need to be overbuilt in order to achieve grade and compaction. By overbuilt, we mean the aggregate base and asphalt concrete will need to be paved wider than the plan shows. Before constructing the PCCP, the overbuilt section will need to be sawcut and removed from the job. 1) Will the State pay for the extra aggregate base used to overbuild the section under Item 52 Class 2 Aggregate Base? 2) Will the State pay for the extra HMA-A used to overbuild the section under Item 56 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A)? 3) Will the State pay for the removal of the overbuilt material under Item 40 Roadway Excavation? 4) Where will the state pay for the sawcutting required?
Inquiry submitted 02/24/2021
Response #1:Please bid per the current contract plans. No overbuilt section of AC over AB will be paid. It is up to the discretion of the bidder to utilize construction methods and means necessary to provide proper compaction and grade control .
Response posted 02/25/2021
Inquiry #55: Contract Special Provisions 40-1.02E calls out that the joint filler material must comply with ASTM D6690 for Type IV. This type of sealant is typically used in cold to very cold climates which commonly drop below –28° C in the winter, but do not generally exceed 35° C in the summer. Type IV sealants are soft and should not be used in warm climates. With that said, can Caltrans please provide clarification that a Type IV sealant will be required and also provide a product recommendation and/or a product that is currently on the approved list for use on this project?
Inquiry submitted 02/24/2021
Response #1:Yes, joint filler material must comply with ASTM D6690 for Type IV. Any product meeting this specification will be accepted.
Response posted 02/25/2021
Inquiry #56: Please reference Detail E & F on plan sheet X-6 (7 of 1660). Per Standard Specifications Section 39-3.05, the backfill for Remove Base and Surfacing is to be embankment material however according to the note on the detail, backfill is to be HMA-A. It is unclear how the HMA material used as backfill will be measured and paid. Will it be included in the pay item for HMA-A or is it incidental to the Remove Base and Surfacing item? Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 02/25/2021
Response #1:The place HMA (Type A) quantity shown in Details E and F on X-6 (7 of 1660) for the shoulder backfill is already quantified in the bid set under the pay item 390102 - HOT MIX ASPHALT (TYPE A).
Response posted 02/26/2021
Inquiry #57: Addenda 6 provides revisions to specification 14-6.03D(1). Within this revision, paragraph 1 and 2 on page 3 of the addendum provides language on where the contractor is not allowed to have any ground disturbing activities. It is our understanding that this language only applies to the property within the project limits and any private property used outside the project limits is acceptable pending the intended use follows all regulatory processes, permits, and conditions. Please advise if our understanding of the language provided within addendum 6 and below for reference is not aligned with CALTRANS.
1. The Contractor must assign a Contractor Supplied Biologist(s) (CSB) who oversees compliance provided in Permits, Licenses, Agreements, and Certifications (PLACs) and notifies the Engineer of activities that are not in compliance. The CSB shall be responsible for monitoring all project activities, including construction, concrete pouring, and any ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities in areas. The Resident Engineer may stop work until all activities comply.
2. Contractor shall confine all project-related parking, storage areas, laydown sites, equipment storage, and any other surface-disturbing activities to the project site using, to the extent possible, previously disturbed areas. Additionally, contractor shall not use or cross desert tortoise habitat outside of the marked project site. All staging areas shall be outside of desert washes and be fenced with temporary desert tortoise fencing. Installation and removal of desert tortoise fencing will be monitored by the CSB.
Inquiry submitted 02/26/2021
Response #1:Paragraph 1 and 2 on page 3 of the addendum is referring to areas within Caltrans right of way. Caltrans can’t control for disturbances outside of this area as impacts to these areas are not covered by project permits. Private property used outside the project area is the responsibility of the contractor to get environmentally cleared and permitted if needed for any actions that may cause impacts to said land.
Response posted 03/03/2021
Inquiry #58: In lieu of variable depth paving, would the State allow variable depth cold planing utilizing AMG in order to do constant depth paving? This would minimize differential compaction that could occur with variable depth paving.
Inquiry submitted 03/01/2021
Response #1:Cold plane depths cannot exceed the depths specified on the plans.
Response posted 03/01/2021
Inquiry #59: Approach Slab Type N – will the TPB, filter fabric, geocomposite drain, and slotted plastic pipe be omitted since these new approach slabs tie back into Type R approach slabs?
Inquiry submitted 03/02/2021
Response #1:TPB, filter fabric, geocomposite drain, and slotted plastic pipe are required at the widening portion where Type N approach slabs will be used. Please refer to Standard Plans B9-1, B9-5 and B9-6 as listed on the Structures plans for details of Type N approach slabs. Bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 03/04/2021
Inquiry #60: Please provide breakdown for remove guardrail on Summary of Quantities, Sheet Q-20. Summary of Quantities, Sheet Q-21 & Q-22 shows breakdown for the said item of work except on Sheet Q-20. Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 03/02/2021
Response #1:We will provide an addendum to correct this issue
Response posted 03/03/2021
Inquiry #61: Caltrans has indicated they will transition to a new type of Temporary Concrete Barrier within a few years of the conclusion of this job. Can the Contractor purchase this new type of Temporary Concrete Barrier for this job so that it may be reused on future jobs? If so, please provide a detail for Temporary Concrete Barrier so that the k-rail meets the upcoming change Caltrans has planned.
Inquiry submitted 03/03/2021
Response #1:Approval for a new type of Mash compliant Temporary Concrete Barrier (JJ Hooks) as a replacement for Temporary K-Rail can be found at the following website: www.dot.ca.gov/programs/safety-program/mash
Under the "List of MASH Devices" section, please see the last bullet link labeled "All Other Longitudinal Barrier, MASH (XLSX), where you can find the excel file with the links to the Approval letter and corresponding drawings.
Response posted 03/03/2021
Inquiry #62: - Regarding to bid item #49 - Fiber Roll (1,030 LF). There is no type installation shown on plans and specification. Please verify
Inquiry submitted 03/04/2021
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 03/04/2021
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.