Bidder Inquiries
Caltrans Bidding Connect Account:
Sign In (Sign in is required to access Project Plans)
Create Account (Click here to create a Caltrans Bidding Connect Account)
Viewing inquiries for 04-1Q7214
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: FYI-Caltrans to-All Bidders- How do I register for Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting?
Inquiry submitted 05/12/2025
Response #1:Please do not use the Bidder Inquiry platform for Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting registration; It is for inquiries related to bidding on the project contract. Register in advance of the Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting, and no later than 1 hour before the meeting time, by sending an email with bidder information to D4.Construction.Duty.Senior@dot.ca.gov Please include the project number & "Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting", within the subject of the email.
Response posted 05/12/2025
Response #2:Companies that attended the Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting: • A1 Protective Services, Inc. • Access Limited Construction • Auriga Corporation • Bay Cities Paving & Grading, Inc. • Condon-Johnson & Associates, Inc. • CoreStone Archaeology, LLC • Crosstown Electrical & Data • DeSilva Gates Construction • Geostructural Engineering Inc • Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. • hb associates architects inc • K14FPM • Kana Subsurface Engineering • Marinship Development Interest LLC • Mercer Fraser Company • MM Energy and Lighting • Mosaic Global Transportation • NET ELECTRIC, INC • O.C. Jones & Sons, Inc. • Phantom Builders • Quanta U.S., Inc. • RTS Management Solutions, Inc • Santamaria Concrete Inc. • Security Paving Company, Inc. • Situ-Ye Structural Engineering & Natural Design Inc • St. Francis Electric • Teichert Energy & Utilities • Tennyson Electric, LLC • Tonma, LLC • Tricore Panels • Yellowstone CP llc •
Response posted 06/17/2025
Response #3:For the contact list, click on the link: http://website.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-1Q7214/MPBM%20Contact%20List%2004-1Q7214.pdf
Response posted 06/17/2025
Inquiry #2: Is EMS82176 product model, that is listed under current D4’s VMS approved product, considered VMS approved equal for this project?
Inquiry submitted 05/21/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/21/2025
Response #2:The bidder should provide a VMS that complies with the State’s Specifications. For information about electrical equipment that is on the State’s Approved Material List, the bidder should check with the AML which is available on the State’s website.
Response posted 05/22/2025
Inquiry #3: Can the CAD / drawing files be made available for download?
Inquiry submitted 06/04/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/05/2025
Response #2:CAD drawing files are not available.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Response #3:Attention is directed to the Cross Sections in the informational handouts.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Inquiry #4: This project includes a DBE participation goal and is currently scheduled to bid on July 3rd. However, July 4th is a national holiday, which significantly impacts the timeline for post-bid documentation. As part of the DBE requirements, DBE paperwork and good faith effort documentation must be submitted no later than the fifth business day following the bid opening. With the holiday falling on a Friday, contractors will have only one business day to prepare and submit their paperwork. Several subcontractors have indicated they will be unavailable due to the holiday and planned time off, which will severely limit DBE participation and hinder the contractor’s ability to complete the required forms. We request that the bid date be postponed to ensure contractors have sufficient time to meet the DBE documentation requirements and encourage more DBE participation.
Inquiry submitted 06/11/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Response #2:Kindly be reminded DBE paperwork and good faith effort documentation must be submitted no later than the fifth business day following the bid opening, which would not fall on the day after July 4th.
Response posted 06/19/2025
Inquiry #5: On sheet E-99, there is structure mounted conduit called out (note 22), but the SES plans do not show any details or reference specific to this bridge. Please provide detail for this structure mounted conduit.
Inquiry submitted 06/13/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Response #2:Please see plan sheets SES-30 and SES-31 for the mounted conduit details.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #6: Sheet E-101 shows trenching (note 20) through Amador Valley Rd. It seems like this portion across the street should be construction note 25 (Horiz Directional Drilling). Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 06/13/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Response #2:See Standard Specifications for options.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Inquiry #7: On multiple pages of the layouts, the limits of roadway work are not shown, such as on L-11. Will the limit of each roadway section be added in with an addendum?
Inquiry submitted 06/13/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Response #2:Other than L-11, what are the other sheets?
Response posted 06/16/2025
Inquiry #8: On multiple pages of the layouts, the limits of roadway work are not shown, such as on L-11. Will the limit of each roadway section be added in with an addendum?
Inquiry submitted 06/13/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Response #2:See Addendum No. 1.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Inquiry #9: The pages missing clear limits of structural sections are L-10, L-11, L-14, and L-30.
Inquiry submitted 06/16/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/16/2025
Inquiry #10: Can Caltrans check the retaining wall structural concrete quantity for RW #26B? Our take-off for this Type 1, Case 2 wall, is 1630 CY. The quantity listed for this wall in the table is 1334 CY. Since this bid item is final pay, it could make a big difference for bidding purposes.
Inquiry submitted 06/16/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/16/2025
Response #2:The structural concrete quantity for RW 26B is correct.
The top of wall elevations shown on the plans should be used for the quantity take-off.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #11: Can you please post the attendance list from the mandatory Virtual Webex Meeting that was held on June 16th? Thank you!
Inquiry submitted 06/17/2025
Response #1:The list has been posted.
Response posted 06/17/2025
Inquiry #12: Please confirm CMS model and dimensions, there is contradicting model information in plans.
Plans S-49 and SD-14 state "CMS700". SD-14 shows "CMS700" dimensions. But E-65 states to install "Type 1 CMS Panel." Please advise.
Inquiry submitted 06/17/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/17/2025
Response #2:Type 1 CMS Panel.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Inquiry #13: Can you confirm if CMS is 1P-120V or 2P-240V? Plans sheet E-65 shows "120V", while ED-1 shows CMS panel "20-240V".
Inquiry submitted 06/17/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/17/2025
Inquiry #14: On Plan Sheets E-363 through E-368, which show the proposed fiber optic cable installation across the Benicia Bridge (Note 1), please confirm whether the specified FO cable is armored.
Inquiry submitted 06/17/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/17/2025
Response #2:It is not armored cable.
Response posted 06/18/2025
Inquiry #15: Please provide the Engineers Estimate pricing for each bid item used to come up with the total Engineers Estimate of $94,000,000
Inquiry submitted 06/18/2025
Response #1:Caltrans does not provide the item by item estimate.
Response posted 06/18/2025
Inquiry #16: Bidder inquiry number four pointed out to the state that the bid date is one day prior to a national holiday and the difficulties associated with obtaining quotes and putting together the good faith effort. Is the state going to push the bid date as requested in the inquiry?
Inquiry submitted 06/19/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/19/2025
Response #2:The bid open is expected to be delayed one week. Official notice of bid open delay is provided through addendum only.
Response posted 06/19/2025
Inquiry #17: The specification is missing Section 87-12 for changeable message sign.
Inquiry submitted 06/19/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/19/2025
Inquiry #18: Bid item 173 Concrete Barrier (Type 60MD MOD) shows a quantity of 5,545.7 LF. Sheet Q-3 shows quantities for walls 24A, 24B, 29A and 29B. The structure plans for these walls also call out for the same quantities. It appears that the correct quantity should be 3,181 LF. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 06/19/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/19/2025
Inquiry #19: Plan Sheets E-363 and E-368, Note 2, reference the installation of a 3” conduit from the FOV to the existing cable tray. Please provide additional details on how this 3” conduit is to be routed and transitioned into the bridge structure.
Additionally, Note 2 only appears at the two ends of the bridge and does not extend across the full span of the structure (E-364 to E-367). Given that the fiber optic cable is not armored and would otherwise be exposed to the elements, please confirm whether the 3” conduit is required to continue throughout the length of the existing cable tray.
Inquiry submitted 06/19/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/19/2025
Response #2:There are existing conduits running from existing vaults for medium voltage and fiber connectivity. The proposed vault (FOV) is located next to the existing vaults and contractor will follow the same conduit route and apply the industry standard conduit mounting practice.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #20: For item 142 miscellaneous iron and steel, which are grates for the drainage inlets, are they all 24-12 or 24-12X or a mixture of both?
Inquiry submitted 06/19/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Response #2:All grates are Type 24-12.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #21: Due to the complexity of the project, we respectfully request the bid date to extended by at least two to three weeks from the original bid date to allow Contractors and Subcontractors sufficient time and to analyze the project thoroughly and judiciously.
Inquiry submitted 06/19/2025
Response #1:The bid open is expected to be delayed one week. Official notice of bid open delay is provided through addendum only.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Inquiry #22: We do not believe that Response #2 adequately addresses Inquiry #4. This project is scheduled to bid on July 3rd, with the DBE paperwork and Good Faith Effort documentation due no later than the fifth business day following bid opening, July 8th. Given that July 4th is a national holiday, contractors will have only one business day to complete the required paperwork. This timeline presents significant challenges, as contractors will only have July 7th to prepare the paperwork, obtain signatures from DBE subcontractors, and mail it to the State. Many subcontractors have already expressed that they will be unavailable due to the holiday and planned time off. As a result, several firms have indicated they will not participate in this bid. This will severely impact DBE participation and limit the competitiveness of the pricing the State receives. We are requesting that the bid date be postponed to promote participation, ensure contractors have the opportunity to meet the DBE goal, and provide adequate time to complete the required paperwork.
Inquiry submitted 06/20/2025
Response #1:The bid open is expected to be delayed one week. Official notice of bid open delay is provided through addendum only.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Inquiry #23: In Addendum #1, Caltrans added Type Type 6A walls at Locations 24 and 29. Can you tells us what the Design 'H' is for each of these walls?
Inquiry submitted 06/20/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Response #2:Design “H” is 6’.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Inquiry #24: Bid Items 127, 128 & 129 for 18", 24" & 42" alternative pipeliner due not indicate the diameter of the of the HDPE or welded steel pipe to use when inserting the proposed pipe inside the existing storm drain. Obviously, the proposed pipeliner cannot be the same size as the host pipe to be lined. Please indicate in the chart on sheet DQ-1 the diameter of the liner pipe for each respective storm drain size.
Inquiry submitted 06/20/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/20/2025
Response #2:The pipeliners should have a nominal diameter of the size indicated on the plan sheets with an inside diameter up to 1-inch less than the nominal diameter. Any gap between the pipeliner and the existing pipe should be filled and free of voids. If a pipeliner with a different inside diameter is used, it must be reviewed and approved by the Resident Engineer prior to installation.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #25: How many mobilizations are expected for Temporary erosion control?
Inquiry submitted 06/21/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Response #2:On sheet ECQ-1, the estimate is 30 locations, and the location number can be combined.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #26: Bid item 92 Minor Concrete (Minor Structure) shows three locations on sheet Q-2. The second and third locations are the same location from two different lines. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 06/23/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #27: Good afternoon,
We are requesting the project deadline be pushed out as it is currently due July 3rd. We've received concerns for our vendors regarding the ability to receive pricing by the date provided. Please consider pushing the bid date by at least one week.
Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 06/23/2025
Response #1:The bid open is expected to be delayed one week. Official notice of bid open delay is provided through addendum only.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #28: In your answer to BI #10, you say that the quantity in the table is correct. Is it possible that the wall should be labeled as a Type 1, Case 1? The footing widths drawn on Plan Sheet #696, for H= 14', correspond to neither Type 1, Case 1 or Type 1, Case 2. For H= 14', the footing width is 9'-7" for Case 1 and 15'-6" for Case 2. Scaling off the plan, shows a width of 11'-6". Please review.
Inquiry submitted 06/23/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #29: There is typically a bid item for " Clean and inspect pipe" that corresponds with pipe liner work. Will this work be required for BI#127-129, and if so will a bid item be added, or is the work included in the bid items for the alt pipeliner work?
Inquiry submitted 06/23/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/23/2025
Inquiry #30: For Location #26, Plan Sheet #467 shows 2 lines for LOC 26. Can you reissue the plan(s), to clarify the LOC 26 line?
Inquiry submitted 06/24/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/24/2025
Inquiry #31: The cross sections issued for LOC 27 do not show the existing retaining wall, barrier, and soundwall. At Station 24+75, the cross section shows a hinge point at 33' right and then a fill area. 33' right is beyond the location of the soundwall, which is approximately 29' right of the LOC 27 line. Can Caltrans issue the correct cross sections for LOC 27 since any take-off we do in this area can not be trusted?
Inquiry submitted 06/24/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/24/2025
Inquiry #32: At LOC 27, the structure plans show an end block where the new barrier starts. Are we constructing an end block or are we tying onto the existing retaining wall and barrier? The plans indicate that the wall at LOC 27 begins where the existing wall ends.
Inquiry submitted 06/24/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/24/2025
Response #2:There is no proposed end block at the beginning of the wall at this location.
However, there is a transition barrier from the old one to the new one.
Response posted 06/25/2025
Inquiry #33: 1. Are cross sections available for Retaining Wall #26A? The sections provided do not show the new wall and soundwall, 26A, but do show #26B.
2. Are Plan Sheets SC-11 and SC-12 supposed to indicate the temporary roadway conditions for constructing RW #26A?
Inquiry submitted 06/24/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/25/2025
Inquiry #34: The cross sections provided for LOC #29, indicate a standard structural concrete wall instead of the designed shotcrete walls w/soil nails. Can Caltrans provide cross sections that show the RW #29A and #29B shotcrete wall construction?
Inquiry submitted 06/24/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/25/2025
Inquiry #35: On Sheet Q-3, there is architectural treatment shown for RW #29 A and #29B, with a quantity of 4545 SF, which also corresponds with Bid Item #94. These walls have a sculpted shotcrete finish with stain. Where is the architectural treatment being applied?
Inquiry submitted 06/24/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/25/2025
Response #2:For sculpted shotcrete and prepare & stain shotcrete location see “ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS” on Structure Plans.
Response posted 06/26/2025
Inquiry #36: Is there a tree removal plan for each of the locations or will Caltrans have the trees removed prior to construction?
Inquiry submitted 06/24/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/25/2025
Response #2:There are no separate tree removal plans, all existing trees impacted and within the clearing and grubbing limit are to be considered as part of CLEARING AND GRUBBING work.
Response posted 06/26/2025
Inquiry #37: Regarding the 4545 SQFT of "Architectural Treatment, Retaining Wall," please clarify where this is to be applied. Is this for RW 26B as shown on Pg. 702, or for RW 29A / RW 29B as shown in the quantities on Pg. 675?
Inquiry submitted 06/25/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/25/2025
Inquiry #38: Per your response to Inquiries #4, 16 & 22 you state: 'Kindly be reminded DBE paperwork and good faith effort documentation must be submitted no later than the fifth business day following the bid opening, which would not fall on the day after July 4th'.
Per the Specifications, pg 32, DBE paperwork is due 'No later than 4pm on the 5th day after the bid opening.
Please further clarify the due date of the DBE and GFE paperwork.
Inquiry submitted 06/25/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/26/2025
Inquiry #39: The response to bidder inquiries 22 and 27 state that the bid date is going to be pushed one week. When will an addendum be provided changing the bid date?
Inquiry submitted 06/26/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/26/2025
Inquiry #40: Please provide a bid item and quantity sheet for the minor HMA trench paving shown on sheet ED-15.
Inquiry submitted 06/26/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/26/2025
Inquiry #41: At Location 10, is there a lane closure chart for SB 680 for the Lane 1 paving and lane closure of southbound 680 Lane 4 to pave the southbound on-ramp?
Inquiry submitted 06/26/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/26/2025
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.