Bidder Inquiries

Sign In | Create Account

Viewing inquiries for 06-0U09U4

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: Will all biological/environmental compliance be the responsibility of Caltrans, or will a contractor need to hire a biologist?
Inquiry submitted 04/16/2018

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/17/2018


Response #2:The contractor will need to comply with all of the restrictions in the permits but the preconstruction surveys and monitoring will be conducted by a Caltrans biologist.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #2: In a review of the plans for this project, it seems all locations for the Cured In Place Pipeliners are missing from the Drainage Plan Sheets. Additionally, the Drainage Quantities (sheet DQ-1) show drainage systems 1 and 2 have CIPP Pipeliners, but there is no Drainage Plan Sheet associated with these locations. Please advise
Inquiry submitted 04/16/2018

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/17/2018


Response #2:There are no drainage layout sheets for Cured-In-Place Pipeliners (CIPP). Please refer to drainage details sheets and drainage quantity sheets for information on CIPP.
Response posted 04/19/2018




Inquiry #3: In spec section 39-3.04C(3), it states "Haul and stockpile 50% of planed materials at PM 27.50 within Right of Way." Will the contractor be allowed to haul and stockpile 100% of planed materials to this location?
Inquiry submitted 04/17/2018

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/19/2018


Response #2:No. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 04/20/2018




Inquiry #4: On Plan sheet DP-2, Z-2 lead is shown on drainage system number six. Will the state please provide a bid item to handle this hazardous material?
Inquiry submitted 04/26/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/26/2018


Response #2:
Type Z-2 material will be encountered while trenching for culverts. Trenching for culverts is not paid separately. There is no separate bid item for handling type Z-2 material.

Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 04/27/2018




Inquiry #5: Will the state please consider revising spec section 8-1.04C to a more appropriate 55 day start after Contract approval for the following reasons? In the current specs the Contractor is to submit the SWPPP Risk Level 2 and have approved for a project over a 20 mile stretch of roadway, submit copies of the Temp Creek Diversion system plans for required drainage systems with calculations, pumping plans, debris handling, fish screens etc, CPM Baseline schedule approved and agree on a DRB for this project, not to mention mobilizing crews and equipment. With all items listed above it would seem a bit aggressive to start within 15 days of contract approval, please revise.
Inquiry submitted 04/26/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/26/2018


Response #2:
Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 04/27/2018




Inquiry #6: In spec section 13-12.01A,B and C it covers the Temporary Creek Diversion system. Will the state please notify the contractor which drainage systems are anticipated to require a temporary Creek Diversion system? Also, will the state provide necessary information in order for the contractor to assume pump sizing, fish screens, etc? As very limited information on anticipated flows and locations is provided in specifications or information handouts.
Inquiry submitted 04/26/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/26/2018


Response #2:
Temporary Creek Diversion System applies to all culverts.

Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 04/27/2018




Inquiry #7: In response to the state's response of inquiry #4. Whether or not there is a separate pay item for trenching culverts is irrelevant. On past Caltrans projects that have had roadway excavation bid items, but also have Z-2 lead to remove; there have been two bid items one for Roadway Ex and the other for Roadway Ex Type Z-2 Lead. Furthermore, to ask the contractor to place a high dollar item of removing a hazardous waste into an item paid by the Linear foot is uncommon and a risk if the bid item paid by the Linear foot was to under run. Please reconsider your response by adding a separate pay item for Z-2 lead.
Inquiry submitted 04/27/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/30/2018


Response #2:
There is no roadway excavation on this project hence no pay item for it. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/02/2018




Inquiry #8: In response to the State's response of inquiry #6. Please provide necessary information for all culverts in order for the contractor to assume pump sizing, fish screens and average flows.
Inquiry submitted 04/27/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/30/2018


Response #2:
Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/02/2018




Inquiry #9: Per the revised standard specifications dated 7/21/2017 and section 37-2.05A it states that "Traffic must not be allowed on a SAMI" does that mean the SAMI that has been placed must be paved on the same shift?? And since the majority of the project is two lanes do we have to SAMI and pave one side, switch traffic onto the newly paved lane and then SAMI and pave the other side on every shift??
Inquiry submitted 04/27/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/30/2018


Response #2:
Traffic is allowed on SAMI-R. Please see Division V Surfacings and Pavements, section 37 Bituminous Seals paragraph 2 (delete the 3rd paragraph in section 37-2.05A in RSS).
Response posted 05/02/2018




Inquiry #10: On drainage profile 11 no existing rocks or boulders are shown on the profile for drainage system Number 54 (C). These boulders carry all the way down to the proposed flow line of the new Concrete FES. Will the state require the contractor to cover the newly constructed concrete pipe with boulders, or will the contractor be allowed to back fill the pipe trench with native soil in lieu of existing boulders?
Inquiry submitted 05/02/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/02/2018


Response #2:Follow Standard Plan A62D for culvert excavations and backfill.
Response posted 05/10/2018




Inquiry #11: Will controlled blasting be required to construct the proposed drainage systems, and if so will the state please provide a bid item for this work?
Inquiry submitted 05/02/2018

Response #1:
Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/02/2018


Response #2:The Department does not specify certain methods to trench for culverts. The bid item is full compensation for all work involved in culvert replacement. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/10/2018




Inquiry #12: Section 71-3.08B(1) specifies minimum wall thicknesses for the CIPP liner. At three of the culverts, which are 24" & 30" in diameter (PM 52.31, 56.54, & 62.09), the specified minimum CIPP wall thickness is 2.0 inches (50.8 mm). This 2.0 inch specified minimum thickness far exceeds the design thickness that would be yielded per the specified design parameters in section 71-3.08A(3).8, and in these diameters, this 2.0 inch thickness would be physically impossible to install. We request that these 2.0 inch minimum thicknesses be deleted, or at the very least, be revised to be no greater than the 0.7 inches specified for other culverts. If they are not deleted or revised, it will not be possible to line these culverts with CIPP that complies with the specifications, and as such, we will not be able to bid or quote the CIPP lining for this project, and likely, no other CIPP firms will either.
Inquiry submitted 05/07/2018

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/08/2018


Response #2:The calculated minimum thickness of the liner will govern. Please refer to section 71-3.08A(3) Submittals.
Response posted 05/10/2018




Inquiry #13: The plans appear to not have variable depth cold planing and paving where it occurs. Without this, it can only be expected to return the same smoothness of the existing road. Please consider allowing variable cold planing and paving in order to maximize improvements.
Inquiry submitted 05/15/2018

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/16/2018


Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/22/2018




Inquiry #14: The 64-28 oil is specified for all HMA on this project, but this oil is more costly and not as readily available.Will the state consider allowing 64-10 oil for the HMA used in the trench patch areas only, as the trench patches will be cold planed and paved over with 64-28 oil by the end of the project?
Inquiry submitted 05/18/2018

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/22/2018


Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/22/2018




Inquiry #15: Regarding items 87-90, will the Department accept substituting the Two-Component Polyurea paint with Two-Component Epoxy? There are no striping trucks capable of spraying polyurea paint available for this job.
Inquiry submitted 05/22/2018

Response #1:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/22/2018


Response #2:
Response posted 05/22/2018




Inquiry #16: Will the Department please provide the post mile locations of Grouse Creek, Tamarack Creek & Sycamore Creek. These are not shown on the project plans.
Inquiry submitted 05/22/2018

Response #1:Please reference the information handout.
Response posted 05/22/2018


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