Bidder Inquiries

Sign In | Create Account

Viewing inquiries for 03-2F5904

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: Are the trees being removed in this contract or a separate one?
Inquiry submitted 03/02/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/02/2018


Response #2:
The trees have been cut down by CT Maintenance. The downed trees and stumps will need to be removed under this contract.
Response posted 03/05/2018


Response #3:
Some of the trees have been cut down by CT Maintenance. Those downed trees and stumps and the remaining trees will need to be removed under this contract.
Response posted 03/05/2018




Inquiry #2: Rock Excavation Specification mentions Pre-splitting but contract calls for 2:1 cut slopes of flatter so will pre-splitting of 2:1 slopes be required or can some other form of drilling and blasting these cut slopes be utilized?
Inquiry submitted 03/08/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/08/2018


Response #2:
Your attention is directed to Section 19-4.01C, "Construction", of the Revised Standard Specifications on page 42 of 263 of the Project Notice to Bidders and Special Provisions and also the Geotechnical Design Report located in the Informational Handout. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 03/15/2018




Inquiry #3: Please reference Sheet Q-1, Roadway Quantities.

The Embankment quantity shown appears to be the sum of Rock Excavation and Roadway Excavation and not reflect the actual Embankment Quantity within the associated Stationing regions. Please provide the correct Embankment Quantities.

Please reference profile sheets P-1 - P-8.

Grading quantities are missing or incomplete at the bottom of these sheets. Please provide this information. Please differentiate between Rock Excavation and Roadway Excavation.

Inquiry submitted 03/14/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/15/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #4: We would like to make an appointment to view the core samples for this project. Can you please provide contact name and phone number to make this appointment? Thank you!
Inquiry submitted 03/19/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/20/2018


Response #2:
Please send your request for viewing the core samples to Coreroom@dot.ca.gov.
Response posted 03/26/2018


Response #3:
Your attention is directed to paragraph 4 of Section 2-1.06B, Supplemental Project Information, of the Revised Standard Specifications on page 3 of 263.
Response posted 03/26/2018




Inquiry #5: Plan sheet C-2 depicts two driveways. One with an HMA-A section on embankment and one with what appears to be a variable section of HMA-A. Please clarify the HMA section thickness for each driveway situation. Additionally for the variable HMA-A driveway please clarify if this detail is for an overlay of an existing driveway or construction of a new driveway in place of an old driveway. Please also clarify the same for the driveway at station 158+69.05 on plan sheet C-3 and the two driveways depicted on plan sheet C-4. There is an AC driveway detail on plan sheet C-5 but no information as to which driveways would conform to this detail.
Inquiry submitted 03/23/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/23/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #6: Please clarify what structural section is required for the detail on plan sheet C-3 for Hammonton Smartsville Road.
Inquiry submitted 03/23/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/23/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #7: A table for the Stage Construction Quantities is shown in the lower left corner of plan sheet Q-2. This table only shows quantities for the work in Stage 1. The Stage Construction Plans show work in additional stages. Please clarify the required work in the subsequent stages of construction.
Inquiry submitted 03/23/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/23/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #8: Do you want Type 1 or Type 2 for the Reinforced Silt Fence?
I also want to confirm that you want Coconut Fiber for the Fiber Rolls.

Inquiry submitted 03/27/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 03/28/2018


Response #2:(#8)-For question number 2, your attention is directed to Section 21-2.02P of the Standard Specifications.
Response posted 04/12/2018


Response #3:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry (question No. 1). Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #9: The typical sections for the project show what appears to be a paved ditch extending from the EP to the back of Dike. No call out is made for the material type or thickness for this section. Please clarify the type(s) of material required and the thickness for this section.
Inquiry submitted 04/03/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/03/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #10:
Engineer's estimated quantity for Bid Item 80, 24" CIDH Piling, is considerably greater than calculated length using cutoff and tip in the pile data table for number of pile shown in each foundation. Where is the rest of the piling?

Inquiry submitted 04/03/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #11: Plan sheet L-2 does not show the toe of slope lines. Please provide.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #12: Plan sheet SC-2 is showing a controlled blasting area. According to seismic line 4 in the informational handout, the contractor will hit significantly hard rock in the cut from +/- station 145+00 to 147+00, yet this area is not hatched as a controlled blasting area. If the state believes the hatched area on plan sheet SC-2 will need to be blasted, why has it not indicated everywhere else on the project the contractors should expect blasting? Since the state has not indicated anywhere else on the project that the excavation will need to be blasted, will they be paying for any need for additional blasting at force account?
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1: (#12)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #13: Note 2 of the staging notes on plan sheet SC-2 says to apply the Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt-Open Graded in stage 4. Note 1 of the staging notes on plan sheet SC-8 says to apply the RHMA-OG in this area in this stage. Why would the state want to do this small area by itself in stage 2 instead of waiting to do all RHMA-OG in stage 4 as indicated on sheet SC-2? Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#13)Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #14: Plan sheet SC-4 is showing the design of the roadway but is not hatched to be built in stage 1 like the rest of the plans in this stage. Please confirm this portion of the project is to be built in stage 1.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1: (#14)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #15: Plan sheet SC-5 – the plan view of this stage drawing is showing one run of k-rail to be installed. The detail from station 147+41.21 to 154+50.00 shows 2 runs of k-rail to be installed. Which is correct? If the detail is correct, is the run of k-rail on the plan view showing the location of the k-rail on the new roadway surface or the existing roadway surface at the bottom of the 1:1 slope?
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#15)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:
04/20/18: An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #16: Note 1 of the staging notes on plan sheet SC-5 indicated the sequence of installing the new 60” RCP in place of the 5x5 box culvert but the anticipated flow rate of the farm canal is not provided. Please provide the flow rate for all farm canal restoration areas and anywhere there will need to be any temporary creek diversions.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:Flow rates are expected to be minimal during the periods that work is allowed in the canals. NID expects their flows to be less than 1-cfs although additional flows could be present depending on weather conditions.
Response posted 04/10/2018




Inquiry #17: Note 2 on plan sheet SC-8 says to shift k-rail on the existing highway to the number one lane in the eastbound of the existing road. From what station to what station is this k-rail to be shifted? Please provide a plan sheet showing the location and stationing of this run of k-rail.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#17)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #18: The plan view on plan sheet SC-9 is showing 3 runs of k-rail, the detail on this sheet is showing 1, and notes 2 & 4 of the staging notes indicate there being 2 runs of k-rail. Please provide a plan sheet that clearly shows how much and where the k-rail is to be placed in stage 2.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#18)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #19: Plan sheet SC-10 shows a run of k-rail but is not showing any crash cushions on either end of the run. Please indicate where crash cushions are to be installed and verify that the bid item quantity is correct for the alternate crash cushion item.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1: (#19)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #20: Plan sheet SC-11 is showing 2 runs of k-rail in this stage and it is not shown in the quantity sheets as needed. What are these runs of k-rail for? They do not seem to be needed in this stage.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1: (#20)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/04/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #21: Traffic handling plan TH-2 is showing both k-rail and traffic drums at the McGanney Lane entrance from HWY 20. Does the state want both drums and k-rail, or just k-rail as indicated on the staging plans?
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#21)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #22: The traffic handling plans for stage 4 form station +/-155+00 to the end of the job show cars traveling west bound being within 10 feet of the new structural section excavation but there is no k-rail shown on the staging plans for stage 4. Please confirm there will be no need for k-rail in stage 4 as it shows on the plans.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#22)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:No K-rail is required for Stage 4 construction.
Response posted 04/10/2018




Inquiry #23: Plan sheet Q-1 – The embankment quantities shown on the roadway quantities appear to be incorrect. As it is shown the states is anticipating all material that is excavated in the given stationing will be placed as fill. While this would be ideal there has been no grading factor accounted for in either the excavation or embankment quantities. If the project ends up with an excess of material, the off haul of the material would be paid under the excavation items. However, if the project ends up short on material and import borrow is brought to the site there is no pay item for doing this. Please provide a more accurate quantity chart for the excavation and embankment on the project, and an import borrow item if the state discovers it is needed when confirming quantities.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#23)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #24: Plan sheet Q-2 – The k-rail chart is incorrect. Please revise the chart and bid item quantity accordingly.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#24)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #25: This inquiry is in regards to the traffic control charts. The staging plans indicate the variable overlay and the open grade overlay are to be constructed in stage 4. Utilizing traffic chart K1 is the safest way to construct these overlays however, for the last tenth of a mile the specifications give a different chart (K2) in which we are to keep one lane of traffic open at all times. Given the speeds of traffic in the area, we request to be able to use traffic control chart K1 for the last tenth of a mile of the project to be able to construct that portion of the variable and open grade overlays in a safe manner.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#25)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #26: A SWPP risk level of 3 seems excessive for this project. Please consider changing the risk level of this project to a level 2.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#26)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:Risk Level 3 is the correct risk level.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/11/2018




Inquiry #27: Specification section 13-12.03A indicates the time period between October 15 and April 15 is when temporary creed diversions can be used to construct culverts in canal areas. Is this supposed to be the time period between April 15 and October 15? Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#27)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:The time period shown in the specs is correct. The work at the NID facilities has to be completed during periods of low demand by NID customers.
Response posted 04/13/2018




Inquiry #28: Bid Item number 78, Cold Plane Asphalt Concrete Pavement has a quantity of 14,100 SY. This work is only indicated in the “box 2” structural section shown on plan sheet X-1. Structural section #2 is shown at the following locations; Sta “A6” 102+75 to 103+75, and 176+50 to 186+00. Based on this information, the bid quantity appears to be greatly over-stated. Please revise the bid quantity or the Typical Section details to correct this issue.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#28)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #29: From station +/- 154+00 to the end of the project the typical cross sections and the earthwork cross sections are not showing the same information. The typical cross sections are showing an HMA variable overlay across the entire road with the RHMA-G and the RHMA-O placed on that. The earthwork cross sections in at these stations show +/- 8 feet of shoulder on both sides of the road being reconstructed with the full sectional depth. Please clarify which is correct.
Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#29)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #30: Please provide structural sections for driveways and minor roadways which tie into Highway 20.
Ie. Smatsville Road, as well as the driveway realignment on sheet C-6.

Inquiry submitted 04/04/2018

Response #1:
(#30)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/05/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #31: The bid schedule does not have an item for "Shoulder Backing." Looking at the typical sections it appears that shoulder backing is necessary in several areas. Particularly those areas that call for a "Tapered Edge" on the pavement. Can a Bid Item be added for shoulder backing.
Inquiry submitted 04/06/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/06/2018


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/12/2018




Inquiry #32: Will the bid opening date be extended considering the 28 unanswered bidder inquiries?
Inquiry submitted 04/06/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/06/2018


Response #2: An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 2, issued on Monday, April 09, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/13/2018




Inquiry #33: With regards to Item 013 Portable Changeable Message Sign (LS), the specifications nor the plans indicate number of CMS's that are working for this project and or locations of CMS's. please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 04/06/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/06/2018


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/12/2018




Inquiry #34: Will the bid opening date be extended considering the 28 unanswered bidder inquiries?
Inquiry submitted 04/06/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/06/2018


Response #2: An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 2, issued on Monday, April 09, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/13/2018




Inquiry #35: With all the unanswered Bidder Inquiries will the Bid date be extended?
Inquiry submitted 04/06/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/06/2018


Response #2:An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 2, issued on Monday, April 09, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/13/2018




Inquiry #36: For blast vibration limits please define "highway facility", if existing roadways are included in highway facility please consider increasing vibration limits on existing roadway.
Inquiry submitted 04/06/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/09/2018


Response #2:
Existing roadways are included in the definition of a highway facility. Your attention is directed to paragraph 7 of section 19-4.04C(1) of the Revised Standard Specifications.
Response posted 04/19/2018




Inquiry #37: The geotechnical design report supplied by Caltrans to the bidders recommends that Caltrans utilize a general earthwork factor of 1.3 for quantity estimating and balancing purposes. Contrary to that recommendation, our earthwork takeoff indicates that Caltrans has used an earthwork factor closer to 1.0. Therefore, if the geotechnical report is approximately correct there is a potential for a surplus of 50,000 +/- CY of material that the contractor will be responsible for removing offsite unless the embankments can be widened enough to utilize the surplus.

Can the bidders rely on utilizing the surplus within the limits of the project?

Inquiry submitted 04/09/2018

Response #1:
(#37)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/09/2018




Inquiry #38: The geotechnical design report supplied by Caltrans to the bidders recommends that Caltrans utilize a general earthwork factor of 1.3 for quantity estimating and balancing purposes. Contrary to that recommendation, our earthwork takeoff indicates that Caltrans has used an earthwork factor closer to 1.0. Therefore, if the geotechnical report is approximately correct there is a potential for a surplus of 50,000 +/- CY of material that the contractor will be responsible for removing offsite unless the embankments can be widened enough to utilize the surplus.

Can the bidders rely on utilizing the surplus within the limits of the project?

Inquiry submitted 04/09/2018

Response #1:
Response posted 04/09/2018


Response #2:
(#38)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/09/2018


Response #3:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Wednesday, April 18, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/09/2018




Inquiry #39: As this project is designated as a RISK 3 LEVEL Water Pollution Control requirement, at what location (s) are the Active Treatment Systems to set up?
Inquiry submitted 04/09/2018

Response #1:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/09/2018


Response #2:The contractor is responsible for preparing the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan based on their proposed construction activities.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/11/2018




Inquiry #40: Risk Level 3 project will require temp sediment basins developed to capture watershed prior to discharge. There is not enough information provided to determine size of Temp basin and watershed for flood values. Please provide clarification on flood frequency values for a graded project at discharge points.
Inquiry submitted 04/09/2018

Response #1:
(#40)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/09/2018


Response #2:The contractor is responsible for preparing the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan based on their proposed construction activities.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/11/2018




Inquiry #41: Plan sheet 195 shows 3ea conduits in the Concrete Barrier Type 742 and references Note #4. Note #4 is ”For Future utility, see Roadway Plans.” I cannot find any mention of the size or type of conduits required on the roadway plans. How is this conduit to be paid for? Please provide plans and details for this conduit.
Inquiry submitted 04/09/2018

Response #1:
(#41)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/09/2018


Response #2:Your attention is directed to sheet E-2, page 129, where the size or type of conduit is mentioned. This conduit paid for under bid item #155 as Lump Sum.

Response posted 04/13/2018




Inquiry #42: Please provide more details/information regarding TRM materials required.
Inquiry submitted 04/09/2018

Response #1:
(#42)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/09/2018


Response #2:Your attention is directed to 2015 Standard Specifications Section 21-2.02O(5).
Response posted 04/16/2018




Inquiry #43: The Special Provisions cover page identifies the 2015 Standard Specifications for use on this contract; Section 17-2.03D notes in the second line of that section duff specified in section 21-1.02C. Looking at that Standard Spec. section, 21-1.02C shows it not to be used. Is the Standard Spec. Section 21-1.02C in the 2015 Standards miss printed and should be 21-2.02B Duff?
And should Section 21-2.02B be applied to this contract?

Inquiry submitted 04/12/2018

Response #1:
(#43)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/12/2018


Response #2:Your attention is directed to 2015 Standard Specifications Section 21-2.02B.
Response posted 04/13/2018




Inquiry #44: Layout drawing L-1 shows a run of 8” Corrugated High Density Polyethelene Pipe located at station 101+84.77. Is this conduit buried or is it laying on the slope? Please provide additional clarification on its installation.
Inquiry submitted 04/13/2018

Response #1:
(44)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/16/2018


Response #2:
The conduit will be laying on the slope and anchor in place.
Response posted 04/30/2018




Inquiry #45: The typical sections for the project show a structural section extending from the point labeled EP, Edge of Pavement, to the back of the Hot Mix Asphalt Dike, but no call out is made on the plans sheets as to the composition or thickness of this section. Does the adjacent HMA pavement section extend through this area. If the pavement section does extend to the back of the HMA Dike how is this material paid for. Is the required quantity of included in the HMA bid items, 70 and 71. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 04/18/2018

Response #1:
(#45)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/18/2018


Response #2:Your attention is directed to addendum #3. Required quantity is included in the bid items.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #46: The typical sections show a "Tapered Edge" pavement Edge treatment. Given the native material available on the jobsite it would be very difficult to fill this edge after paving with native embankment material as called for on the typical sections, and Standard plan sheet P76. Could an item be added for shoulder backing in those areas that do not receive HMA Dike.
Inquiry submitted 04/18/2018

Response #1:
(#46)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.


Response posted 04/18/2018


Response #2:
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #47: Please clarify the pay limits and/or the criteria for how excavation will be classified as either Bid Item 44 Roadway Excavation, or Bid Item 45 Rock Excavation (Controlled Blasting)
Inquiry submitted 04/18/2018

Response #1:
(#47)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/18/2018


Response #2:
Bidder's attention is directed to informational handout "Geotechnical Design Report".
Response posted 04/18/2018




Inquiry #48: Under section 13-3.01A of the contract special provisions the projects risk is classified as a risk level 3. The contract documents do not provide enough information on expected flows to design adequately sized Temporary Settlement Basins, or the Active Treatment system. Please provide additional information as to expected flows from the watershed.
Inquiry submitted 04/18/2018

Response #1:
(#48)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/18/2018


Response #2:
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/26/2018




Inquiry #49: Addendum 2 for this project stated "An addendum will follow advising you of additional changes." To date no additional addendums has been issued, and many bidders inquiries remain unanswered. With the new bid date fast approaching is it your intention to further postpone the bid date.
Inquiry submitted 04/19/2018

Response #1:The issue date of the addendum to advise you of additional changes is pending.
The bid opening is still April 26, 2018.
Response posted 04/19/2018




Inquiry #50: After reviewing the quantities given for this project, there are numerous items that may have incorrect quantities.
Please verify quantities for the following items:
14 - Temp Railing Type K
44 - Roadway Ex
45 - Rock Excavation (Controlled Blasting)
68 - Aggregate Base
72 - RHMA-O
77 - Tack Coat
79 - Remove Base and Surfacing
80 - 24" CIDH
115 - Obliterate Surfacing
118 - Chain Link Fence (Type CL-6, Slatted)

Inquiry submitted 04/19/2018

Response #1:
(#50)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/19/2018


Response #2:
Your attention is directed to addendum No. 3 for response to item number 14, 45, 72, 79, 80, 115, and 118.
Your attention is directed to addendum No. 5 for response to item number 44, 68, and 77.

Response posted 04/19/2018




Inquiry #51: Payment for item 45 - Rock Excavation (Controlled Blasting) is not indicated in the special provisions, revised standard specifications, or standard specifications. Please provide a payment specification for item 45 - Rock Excavation (Controlled Blasting), per payment specification 19-4.04D.
Inquiry submitted 04/19/2018

Response #1:
(#51)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/19/2018


Response #2: Your attention is directed to Section 19-4.01D of the Revised Standard Specifications which states: "The payment quantity for any type of rock excavation is measured as specified for roadway excavation".
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #52: The addendum 3 earthwork cross sections are showing a full depth shoulder being constructed on each side of the existing highway from station 176+50 to 186+00, however the typical cross sections only show the South side of the existing highway to receive a new shoulder section. Please clarify which scenario is correct.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#52)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 5, issued on Friday, April 27, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/30/2018




Inquiry #53: Addendum sheet SC-9 is not showing any K-rail protecting the work area where traffic will be traveling next to it at the East end of the job in stage 2. Is this correct? Same question for SC-10 in stage 3.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#53)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
Your attention is directed to TH-10 and TH-16 of project plans.
Please bid per current contract documents.

Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #54: With the volume of changes issued with addendum 3 and the additional questions generated from the addendum it is unrealistic to bid this project on the current bid date of April 26, 2018. Please consider postponing the project minimum of 2 weeks.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#54)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 4, issued on Monday, April 23, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #55: We are in receipt of the Addendum 3 that was just issued by Caltrans for this project. Considering the amount of project information provided in the Addendum 3, which includes 50 revised plan sheets, significant bid item quantity changes, X sections, revised foundation report info, etc. and with less than 7 days to review, we strongly request an additional 2 week bid postponement of this project. There are still many important unanswered questions that remain pending for a response.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#55)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 4, issued on Monday, April 23, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #56: With the number of changes in addendum 3, the close proximately it was issued to the bid date, and the material change to some important bid item quantities such as Item 44 Roadway Excavation, Item 45 Rock Excavation(Controlled Blasting), and Item 78 Cold Plane Asphalt Concrete Pavement and. Please consider extending the bid date to allow time for a proper evaluation of the changes.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#56)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 4, issued on Monday, April 23, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/23/2018




Inquiry #57: We are in receipt of the Addendum 3 that was just issued by Caltrans for this project. Considering the amount of project information provided in the Addendum 3, which includes 50 revised plan sheets, significant bid item quantity changes, X sections, revised foundation report info, etc. and with less than 7 days to review, we strongly request an additional 2 week bid postponement of this project. There are still many important unanswered questions that remain pending for a response.

As a courtesy, please consider an informal response to this inquiry prior to COB 4/20/2018 to allow bidders to determine if work through the weekend is required.

Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#57)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 4, issued on Monday, April 23, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 04/26/2018




Inquiry #58: The addendum plans did not have the structural section for the driveway realignment at 182+64. Please provide the structural section for this area.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#58)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 5, issued on Friday, April 27, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.


Response posted 04/30/2018




Inquiry #59: In addendum 3 there were traffic plastic drums that were added for stage 3, however the quantity for the drums was not increased. How will the contractor be paid for the additional drums installed in stage 3?
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#59)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
Response posted 04/26/2018


Response #3:
No additional traffic plastic drums was added to stage 3. Details on SC sheets changed to match TH sheets. Please bid per current contract documents.

Response posted 04/26/2018




Inquiry #60: Addendum #3 Adds a structural section of 1.2ft of Cl 2 AB, 0.25ft of HMA-A, and 0.20ft of RHMA-G for the 3' distance from the point labeled EP to the Face of Dike, labeled FL without increasing the quantity of the corresponding bid items; 68 Cl 2 Aggregate Base, 70 Hot Mix Asphalt(Type A)& 71 Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt(Gap Graded). Were the quantities to do this work already figured into the bid quantities, or do these bid quantities need to be increased.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#60)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
Please bid per the current contract documents.


Response posted 04/26/2018




Inquiry #61: Addendum #3 significantly changed the quantity of Bid Items 44 Roadway Excavation 17,400cy to 10,500cy(40% decrease) and 45 Rock Excavation (Controlled Blasting) 175,000cy to 134,000cy(23% decrease). Looking at the cross sections it is not readily apparent what changes were made to cause this reduction in quantity. A new takeoff of the cross sections will have to be performed in order to properly evaluate these changes. Please allow additional time to properly evaluate these changes.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#61)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/20/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 4, issued on Monday, April 23, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.


Response posted 04/26/2018




Inquiry #62: The Standard Specifications 2015, the Special Provisions for the Contract or Addendum 3 Do not show pay limits, or list a Criteria for what excavation will be paid as Roadway Excavation and what Excavation will be paid as Rock Excavation(Controlled Blasting). Please Clarify.
Inquiry submitted 04/20/2018

Response #1:
(#62)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/23/2018


Response #2:
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/26/2018




Inquiry #63: Typical section 124+50 - 130+00 Indicate a fill section no dike RT. Plans show cut section Dike to 125+38 RT. Cross sections show dike ending at 120+25 RT. SOQ shows dike 117+25 - 126+59 RT.

Please clarify.

Inquiry submitted 04/23/2018

Response #1:
(#63)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.

Response posted 04/23/2018


Response #2:
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 04/30/2018




Inquiry #64: Question 62 needs to be addressed with a clear answer.

The state has differentiated between rock excavation and roadway excavation in the summary of quantities.How was this differentiation made?

For the purposes of measure and payment, how will the state determine which pay item to use?

Inquiry submitted 04/26/2018

Response #1:
(#64)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/27/2018


Response #2:
Your attention is directed to the "Geotechnical Design Report" in the information handout.
Response posted 04/27/2018




Inquiry #65: Is there a specific difference between the "compost blanket" and the "compost" that are both under the "course" material spec definition? If there is a difference, can the specific material spec be designated.
Inquiry submitted 04/27/2018

Response #1:
(#65)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/27/2018


Response #2:
There is no difference between the "compost blanket" and the "compost".
Response posted 04/30/2018




Inquiry #66: Addendum 4, Dated April 23, 2018, states "An addendum will follow advising you of additional changes." To date no additional addendum has been issued. In the revised bid schedule issued with addendum No.3, and on Revised plan sheet Q-1 (sheet 113), in the "ROADWAY QUANTITIES" table from addendum No.3 the quantities for Bid Items #44 Roadway Excavation and Bid Item #45 Rock Excavation (Controlled Blasting) were reduced. This reduction in excavation quantity is not matched in the quantity calculated from the new Cross Sections that were also issued as part of Addendum #3, files ./ad3/03/03-2F5904_XSec1.pdf and ./ad3/03/03-2F5904_XSec2. The quantity calculated from these revised sheets, issued as part of Addendum #3, are close to the original bid quantities for the excavation items. Please clarify when the Additional Addendum mentioned in Addendum #4 will be issued, and the apparent major discrepancy in quantities for the excavation items between the bid schedule issued with Add#3 and the Cross Sections issued with Add#3.
Inquiry submitted 04/27/2018

Response #1:(#66)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 04/27/2018


Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 5, issued on Friday, April 27, 2018.
Please bid per the current contract documents.

Your attention is directed to Information Handout "Geotechnical Design Report".

Response posted 04/30/2018


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.


Contracting Information

Statewide Alerts and Other Information