CONTRACTOR'S INQUIRY RESPONSES
March 21, 2006
CONTRACT NO. 04-0120F4
CONSTRUCT SELF ANCHORED SUSPENSION
County Route: SF-80-8.2/8.7
The responses to contractors' inquiries, unless incorporated into a formal addenda to the contract, are not a part of the contract and are provided for the contractor's convenience only. In some instances, the question and answer may represent a summary of the matters discussed rather than a word-for-word recitation. The responses may be considered along with all other information furnished to prospective bidders for the purpose of bidding on the project. The availability or use of information provided in the responses to contractors' inquiries is not to be construed in any way as a waiver of the provisions of section 2-1.03 of the Standard Specifications or any other provision of the contract, the plans, Standard Specifications or Special Provisions, nor to excuse the contractor from full compliance with those contract requirements. Bidders are cautioned that subsequent responses or contract addenda may affect or vary a response previously given, and any such subsequent response or addenda should be taken into consideration when submitting a bid for the project. Inquiries submitted within seventy-two (72 ) hours of the bid opening date might not be addressed.
The Caltrans District 4 Office is located at 111 Grand Avenue, Oakland, CA 94612. Send Contractor Inquiries via email to the Duty Senior at Duty_Senior_District04@dot.ca.gov. The mailing address is P.O. Box 23660, Oakland, CA 94623-0660. The Duty Senior's telephone number is (510) 286-5209 and the fax number is (510) 622-1805. All inquiries must include the contract number.
| Inquiry No. | Inquiry | Response | ||||||||
|
1.0 |
Where on your website can we locate the Inquiries for Contract 04-0120F4? We cannot find the previous Inquiries for the prior bidding period (783 Inquiries were posted). How will this be handled? | The previous inquiries and responses are not valid and cannot be applied to the current Advertisement package (dated August 1, 2005). Bidders should review the new Advertisement package and submit new inquiries. | ||||||||
|
2.0 |
Section 5-1.25 "PAYMENTS" in the Special Provisions allows partial payment for materials furnished but not incorporated in the work up to 25% of the contract amount. We, however, think this payment amount (25%) is too low for foreign OBG, Tower and Cable suppliers considering their negative impact on cash flow. This negative impact on cash flow will significantly reduce foreign suppliers' intention for participation in the project, or, they will add their interest on loans to the bid price. As a result, both cases will cause cost increases in the project, if the present payment condition is not improved. Therefore, we propose to improve this payment amount from 25% to 50% of the contract amount. | Please refer to the response to Inquiry #86. | ||||||||
|
3.0 |
Payment schedule and amount (rate) for mobilization that are stipulated in Section 10-1.21 "MOBILIZATION" in the Special Provisions should be improved as follows. This will reduce the financial burden to the Contractor and consequently reduce the bid price.
|
To meet the needs of this project, the payment schedule for mobilization provided in the Special Provisions has been substantially altered from the mobilization payment schedule provided in the Standard Specifications. There will not be further changes to the mobilization payment schedule. | ||||||||
|
4.0 |
Information on Pre-Bid Audit is on the Caltrans' website. To achieve fair competition and to save time after award of the Contract, the Pre-Bid Audit should be mandatory for all of related potential suppliers. | The prime contractor may require his suppliers to pass the pre-bid audit, at his option. The Department will make every attempt to audit all submitted pre-bid suppliers prior to bid, however pre-bid audits are not mandatory for any potential suppliers. | ||||||||
|
5.0 |
In the second-to-last paragraph of Section 8-4.01 "AUDITS" of the Special Provisions, payment amount is stipulated in accordance with the date required to pass the Audit from the date of Contract Award. We understand that this Audit is the critical milestone to keep the required quality and the scheduled construction period. In particular, immediate pass of the Audit is essential to keep the construction period. From this standpoint, we think that the payment amount for the early pass of the Audit should be further increased as an incentive to the general contractor / potential suppliers. For example, the payment amount should be improved as follows:
|
No change to this specification is anticipated. However, please refer to the responses for inquiries 214 and 222 for clarifications to issues concerning cash flow. |
||||||||
|
6.0 |
Construction period has been significantly reduced from previous 2310 days to 2130 days. To keep this tight schedule, further effort will be required for not only the contractor (incl. their subcontractor/supplier) but also Caltrans and the Engineers. From this standpoint, we propose to improve the following points as example:
|
Contract time has been extended, please refer to Addendum 7. A. The submittal review periods were developed with the Department's resources in mind. No changes to the review periods are anticipated at this time. B. The Department will endeavor to expedite approvals. It is impossible to specify a system for all submittal scenarios that can occur, however, please note the response to inquiry #105. C. The requirement for preliminary wood mockups in Special Provision section 10-1.59 was removed, please refer to Addendum 6. D. Please be more specific as to what this recommendation is. E. Please be more specific as to which approval requirements should be eliminated. F. The Jones Act is federal law, over which the Department has little control. No changes on this law are anticipated at this time. |
||||||||
|
7.0 |
All of the previous inquiries to the Caltrans website have been deleted. We think they should be revived to avoid unnecessary confusion and to save time for Caltrans to receive and reply to the same inquiries as previous ones. | The previous inquiries and responses are not valid and cannot be applied to the current Advertisement package (dated August 1, 2005). Bidders should review the new Advertisement package and submit new inquiries. | ||||||||
|
8.0 |
Caltrans is strongly requested to put some marks on revised (different) portion(s) in the plans issued on Aug 1, 2005. Otherwise, one by one checking will be necessary to find out the different (revised) portion between the previous last plans and current plans. This benefits Caltrans as well. Otherwise, these costs for checking drawings will be added to the bid price. | The current plans (as advertised August 1, 2005) reflect the work as currently anticipated by the Department. Neither the plans nor the special provisions from the previous advertisement apply in any way to this contract. Section 2-1.09, "Bidders Compensation," of the Special Provisions is included in recognition of the costs of preparing a bid for this project. | ||||||||
|
9.0 |
Erection pieces or fabrication pieces, which are used for erection or fabrication or transportation, could be left permanently, if there were no problem in design and prospect, especially inside of the pentagon of tower. This will help shorten the construction period and provide savings on the project cost. |
Please note that all temporary attachments shall be removed from the Tower and Orthotropic Box Girder. This inquiry is too general as it stands and cannot be addressed. The Contractor is advised to provide specific details of what he has in mind in future bidder inquiries for this to be considered (the bidder should submit his proposal of specific attachments he wishes to leave in place). In addition, please reference the Special Provisions, section 10-1.59 "STEEL STRUCTURES," subsection "ERECTION PLAN," the eighteenth paragraph as revised in Addendum No. 3. Also, please reference inquiry no. 70 and the associated response. |
||||||||
|
10.0 |
Please refer to SP Section 10-1.69, "Clean and Paint Structural Steel," subsection "Painting", 7th and 8th paragraph. It will be almost impossible to control within 60um (90 thru. 150 um) by 2 or more applications of coating. | The limits on dry film thickness for a single coat of inorganic zinc applied in two applications, as described in the contract special provisions, are reasonable. The dry film thickness is measured in accordance with SSPC-PA 2 as specified in the special provisions. SSPC-PA 2 allows a range in individual dry film thickness measurements that can be reasonably achieved to produce a coating dry film thickness within the specified limits. | ||||||||
|
11.0 |
Detail of connection of strut should be reconsidered. See attached drawing. (Click here to get attached drawing - MS Word format). |
The proposed detail in the inquiry results in a significant loss of strength in the connection. The strut details in the plans are critical to the seismic resistance of the tower, and have been laboratory tested. The proposed detail is not acceptable. | ||||||||
|
12.0 |
Detail of connection of longitudinal ribs should be reconsidered. See attached drawing. (Click here to get attached drawing - MS Word format). |
For details to be considered by the Engineer, the proposed details by the Contractor shall have strength that is equal to or greater than that provided for by the details on the contract plans. The proposed detail results in a significant loss of strength in the connection and therefore is not acceptable. | ||||||||
|
13.0 |
Geometry alignment should be reconsidered to eliminate a twist of OBG. See attached drawing. (Click here to get attached drawing - MS Word format). |
Note that there are only three locations where twist would be required in the box girders: panels 8-14 (30m), panels 112-118 (30 m) and panels 120-124 (22 m). Over the 610 m length of the girders this represents less than 15% of the girder fabrication. Please see Table 2 on Plan Sheet 644 of 1204. | ||||||||
|
14.0 |
Trial assembling of "Lift to Lift" requirement should be reconsidered. | The question being asked is unclear. Please note that Addendum No. 2 has relaxed the requirements of the fabrication shop size. If the addendum does not address this inquiry, please clarify the bidder inquiry. | ||||||||
|
15.0 |
It should be considered how to adjust each height of 4 legs of tower during erection. |
Please refer to SP 10-1.59 "Steel Structures," subsection "Assembly," subsection "Tower," paragraph 2: "The ends of each lift shall meet the dimensional requirements given under "Shop Welding," subsection "Design Details" of these special provisions. Each end shall be in a horizontal plane. When standing on its lower end, the top corners of each lift shall remain within specified limits in both horizontal directions. To limit cumulative displacements, ends of the higher lift shall be shimmed or milled to compensate for the actual elevation of the lower lift, if the cumulative displacements are not within specified limits. If the bidder desires modifications to this specification, please follow-up / clarify this bidder inquiry. |
||||||||
|
16.0 |
Connection detail of OBG's web and cross beam's web should be reconsidered. (Continuity of web, ribs should be reconsidered.) | The question being asked is too vague. Please clarify the bidder inquiry. | ||||||||
|
17.0 |
Frequency of Job monitoring tests should be reconsidered or mitigated. | The frequency of job monitoring testing is based on experience gained by the Department and others from research and the construction of several other orthotropic box girder bridges. Please clarify the specific testing regime and the specific item of that regime for which reconsideration is desired. | ||||||||
|
18.0 |
Location of field splices should be reconsidered. Lifting unit should make (be made) smaller, even (if) the number of field joints is increased. |
The question being asked is unclear. It is not known if the bidder is referring to field splices in the Tower or the Box Girder. Please resubmit with more specific details such as the location of the field splices and the number of field splices proposed. Also, please refer to the response to Bid Inquiry #136. |
||||||||
|
19.0 |
Connection detail of OBG's should be reconsidered to simplify by using bolt connection, instead of welding. | The skin plates of field splices of the OBG shall be welded as per the plans and special provisions. | ||||||||
|
20.0 |
PWS cable should be reconsidered comparing with Air spinning. |
Research comparing PWS and AS concluded that PWS will result in a higher quality cable with a longer design life that is consistent with the required 150 year design life of the bridge. The Contractor's bid should comply with the requirements of PWS cable as shown in the contract documents. If the Contractor proposes to erect the cable using the Air Spinning method, such a proposal shall be submitted in accordance with SP 5-1.15 "Cost Reduction Incentive Proposals". The Contractor is reminded that a CRIP should reduce the total project cost or time of construction without impairing, in any manner, the essential functions or characteristics of this contract including, but not limited to, service life, economy of operation, ease of maintenance, benefits to the traveling public, desired appearance, or design and safety standards. |
||||||||
|
21.0 |
Alternative of S cable wrapping wire should be considered for, such as standard wrapping. | Standard wrapping is not acceptable given the 150-year design life of the bridge. | ||||||||
|
22.0 |
Regarding the Engineer's review time of working drawings, procedures, etc stipulated in the Special Provisions 5-1.01, 8-3.01, 10-1.59, 10-1.69, but not limited to, the terms of "working day" and "calendar day" have been revised to "day". Definition of the "day" is unclear. It should be described by "working days" or "Calendar days". | The definition of a working day is provided in Section 4 of the Special Provisions. "A working day is defined as any day, with no exceptions." | ||||||||
|
23.0 |
Please advise if the suppliers who have already received their "contingent pass" or "pass" at the previous Pre-Bid Audit need to take another Pre-Bid Audit again? Or, are the previous Pre-Bid Audit Results available at this time? | All previous audits are null. Suppliers need to be re-submitted and re-audited. Also see response to BI #34. | ||||||||
|
24.0 |
California Company Preference (SP Section 2-1.06):
|
The California company preference only applies to the bidder (prime contractor). Our understanding of the second question is "how does the preference apply to a company that is from a state with no local contractor preferences?" As provided in the specification and Public Contract Code 6107, if the bidder is both 1) from a state with no local contractor preference and 2) a licensed California contractor on the date of bid opening, the bidder qualifies as a California company and is afforded the reciprocal preference for bid comparison purposes against a non-California company. Note that the preferences are only for bid comparison purposes and only come into play when the apparent low bidder is a non-California company. |
||||||||
|
25.0 |
At the Technical Outreach Meeting on August 16, 2005, those of us who used the telephone line to call in could not hear most of what was being said. Will Caltrans make available a tape recording and/or transcript of Brian Maroney's portion of the presentation to those who participated in the telephone call-in procedures? |
Audio from August 16 meeting is available at the following website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/sasoutreach/ |
||||||||
|
26.0 |
Do Caltrans and the FHWA expect that the new "Buy America" clarifications contained in SAFETEA-LU will have any effect on the de-federalization of Contract 04-0120F4? According to information received from the National Steel Bridge Alliance today, the recent legislation clarifies that the Buy America test is to be applied to the sum of all contracts for a particular project, not just contract by contract, thereby invoking Buy America provisions for the SAS Superstructure. As this issue will significantly affect bidding, bidders require a definitive clarification very soon. | The Buy America requirements do not apply to this project. The language about the Buy America requirement applying to the sum of the projects is contained in the sense of Congress portion of the legislation, which is not law and is not binding. | ||||||||
|
27.0 |
I have gone to the online link provided to me by a Caltrans information source to find the plans and special provisions for the current project----the one we're to be bidding on. What I've seen so far looks to be the same as previously available 18 to 24 months ago. Are there changes? Some of the drawings appeared to be earlier than the corresponding earlier drawings, appearing original, unrevised. The many addenda from the previous bid package were not there. Was this an incorrect link? What is the correct one? |
It is not known to which online link the bidder is referring. However, the plans and special provisions for the current advertisement package can be downloaded from the following link: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/project_ads_addenda/04/04-0120F4 |
||||||||
|
28.0 |
Reference Pg 81, SP Section 5-1.01, "Working Drawings," Paragraph A and Standard Specification Section 5-1.02. SP Section 5-1.01.A states that the Engineer will determine whether or not a working drawing is complete, but 5-1.02 states that the Contractor will determine what working drawings are necessary to adequately control the work. How will the Engineer determine what is needed to adequately control the Contractor's work? | As provided in Standard Specification 5-1.02, the contract plans shall be supplemented by such working drawings prepared by the Contractor as are necessary to adequately control the work. Working drawings shall be subject to approval insofar as the details affect the character of the finished work and for compliance with design requirements applicable to the construction when specified or called for. Typically, the minimum requirements for a given working drawing are provided in the same section that requires that working drawing. Attention is also directed to the response for Inquiry #30. | ||||||||
|
29.0 |
Reference Pg 81, SP Section 5-1.01 "Working Drawings," Paragraph A. How long does the Engineer have to review the initial review submittal to determine if the submittal is complete? | Per the same special provision, within 3 days of the receipt of the submittal by the Engineer, the Engineer will notify the Contractor in writing if the submittal is determined to be incomplete. | ||||||||
|
30.0 |
Reference Pg 81, SP Section 5-1.01, "Working Drawings," Paragraph A. Please clearly define what comprises a "complete" submittal. | As stated in Special Provision 10-1.17 "ACCELERATED WORKING DRAWINGS SUBMITTAL," for a submittal to be considered complete, all items listed under the individual submittal requirements shall be completed, and all facets of the operation/element fully developed. | ||||||||
|
31.0 |
Reference the cover page and Page 10 of the Special Provisions. Standard Specifications are listed as July 1999. The current Standard Specs are July 2002. Is the reference to 1999 correct? | The references to the July 1999 Standard Specifications are correct. | ||||||||
|
32.0 |
Please explain the meaning of SP Section 5-1.023, "Unsatisfactory Progress." | Please refer to inquiries 43, 44, and 45. If those inquires do not address the bidder’s question, please submit a new, more specific question. | ||||||||
|
33.0 |
The budget number in the Proposal is $1.45 billion. The envelope to turn in the Proposal has $1.625 billion printed at the bottom of envelope. What dollar value is correct? | The $1.6 billion figure is the Department's budget allocation which includes the engineer's estimate of the bid items, supplemental work, and state furnished materials. The $1.45 billion number is the rounded engineer's estimate of the bid items. | ||||||||
|
34.0 |
At the Technical Outreach Meeting on August 16, 2005, it was stated that the companies that were previously audited and received a "contingent pass" or "pass" must be re-audited. There was considerable time and money spent by suppliers and by Caltrans (taxpayer money) to travel all over the world performing audits. The project today, size, weight, and material, is the same as previously. Why do these companies need to be re-audited? | Companies need to be re-audited due to several factors some of which might include change of scope of work for such suppliers, change in management structures, change in joint ventures between companies, and the fact that these audits were performed over a year ago. These are some of the factors that the Department considered in its decision. | ||||||||
|
35.0 |
Clarify requirement/status of AISC - quality certification for erection. The only reference is vague, on page 313 of Special Provisions, which states that field welding for field fabricators and erectors shall be certified AISC, Category CASE. | AISC has a specific certification program for field fabricators and erectors. Hence, field fabricators and erectors shall be certified under the AISC Quality Certification Program, Category CASE, "Certified Advanced Steel Erector". | ||||||||
|
36.0 |
Will you consider newer welding inspection techniques such as phased array, which will save time? | The contract does not provide for welding inspection techniques such as phased array. Should the Engineer determine that such inspection techniques are acceptable for specific weld types and locations, and efficient in reducing inspection time and contract cost, a contract change order will be required to allow the use of the proposed inspection techniques. | ||||||||
|
37.0 |
What were the last two major bridges using falsework from below? Where are they located? Were there similar seismic issues? | The Yeongjong Grand Bridge in South Korea and the Konohana Bridge in Osaka, Japan. For further information, please refer to http://en.structurae.de/structures/. | ||||||||
|
38.0 |
The Contract calls for many U.S. fabrication standards such as AISC, ASTM, AWS, etc. Many foreign fabrication facilities are more familiar with local or internal standards that in many cases we are told are essentially equivalent to U.S. Standards. Will Caltrans allow the substitution of standards in such a case? | All Contractors bidding on the project must have a uniform set of standards to bid and construct to. Therefore, where specific standards are specified, no substitutions will be allowed. | ||||||||
|
39.0 |
We expect to get our AISC certification by Mid-November. Can Caltrans help expedite this process? | As AISC is an independent organization, the Department cannot provide any assistance with AISC certification. Also, please reference the response to Inquiry No. 47. | ||||||||
|
40.0 |
What is the construction time allowed for the entire job? |
Contract time has been extended, please refer to addendum 7. The total number of working days for the contract is 2490. See Special Provisions Section 4 "Beginning of Work, Time of Completion and Liquidated Damages" and Section 10-1.01 "Order of Work" for more detail. |
||||||||
|
41.0 |
Can you remove the small Caltrans office (TYLin) in the warehouse of Pier 7? | The Department will not relocate the staff currently using the office space inside the warehouse. This may be revised only if a mutually acceptable contract change order can be negotiated at a future date. | ||||||||
|
42.0 |
Can you assign the entire Pier 7 to SAS contractor after the Skyway project is done? | Substantial portions of Pier 7 will be available to the SAS contractor as the Skyway and E2/T1 contracts are completed. Please see Plot map titled "Pier 7- Area for contractor's use" in the Information Hand-out in Addendum no. 3 as well as section 5-1.18 "Areas for Contractor's Use" of the revised specifications in Addendum no.3. | ||||||||
|
43.0 |
Please refer to the fifth paragraph of Special Provision section 5-1.023, which states: "Funds kept or withheld from payment, due to the failure of the Contractor to comply with the provisions of the contract, will not be subject to the requirements of Public Contract Code 7107 or to the payment of interest pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 10261.5." We observe that Public Contract Code 7107 (h) states: "Any attempted waiver of the provisions of this section shall be void as against the public policy of this state." We and our suppliers and subcontractors require that the provisions of Public Contract Code 7107 will be followed. The wording of the quoted sentence must be changed in a way that clarifies that this only applies to the payment of interest on funds properly kept or withheld by the Engineer, without affecting the timing of payments, interest and attorney's fees on overdue or wrongfully withheld payments, etc. | Special provision 5-1.023 "Unsatisfactory Progress" has been removed by Addendum 4. | ||||||||
|
44.0 |
Please confirm that the authority of the Engineer to withhold payments due to unsatisfactory progress (i.e., progress delays) is limited to the provisions of the first through fourth paragraphs of SP 5-1.023 and the application of Standard Specification Section 8-1.07, "Liquidated Damages." In other words, progress delays alone do not rise to the level that allows the Engineer discretion to withhold payments in addition to those specified in the previous sentence of this Inquiry. | Special provision 5-1.023 "Unsatisfactory Progress" has been removed by Addendum 4. The Department will comply with the terms of the contract. | ||||||||
|
45.0 |
When will the funds withheld under SP 5-1.023 be paid if there is never a time that the provisions of the fourth paragraph of SP 5-1.023 allow the withheld funds to be paid to the Contractor? Within 60 days after completion as provided in Public Contract Code 7107? | Special provision 5-1.023 "Unsatisfactory Progress" has been removed by Addendum 4. | ||||||||
|
46.0 |
Please amend the fifth paragraph of SP 5-1.25, "Payments", to clarify that the timing of progress payments for stored materials will be according to receipt and proper storage of materials designated for this project, the progress of the work and a schedule of values to be submitted to the Engineer for approval. In other words, rod, wire, mill steel, rough castings and other components (which are of such character that they are adaptable to another use) will be paid for as long as they have been purchased and designated for this project and properly stored, and work-in-progress (partial assemblies, fabricated subassemblies, segments, lifts, etc.) will be paid as the work progresses, without waiting until final assembly prior to placing in a locked fence area or locked warehouse. Unless Caltrans is willing to make this clarification, other significant improvements in payment terms will be required in order to bid. We note that Caltrans never adequately addressed the universal concern of payment terms expressed during the Inquiry process for the previous bid. Similar concerns are already being raised again by other bidders (see Inquiries 2 and 3). | See Addendum 3 for changes to Special Provision 5-1.25. | ||||||||
|
47.0 |
Special Provision 10-1.59, "Steel Structures," requires that the fabricators and suppliers shall be certified under the AISC Quality Certification Program. Unfortunately, we are not the member of AISC. But we are certified conformity with the quality system of GB/T19001-2000(idtISO9001:2000) standard and the environmental Management System of GB/T24001~ISO14001:1996. Can we substitute the AISC certificate with an equivalent one such as the above two certificates. Or is it still a must that the fabricator shall be a member of AISC. We worry about the time to get through the certifying process. |
Certification of suppliers and fabricators under ISO 9001:2000 quality standard is an acceptable substitution for AISC Quality Certification Program. Substitution of other certification standards will be considered by the Engineer on a case-by-case basis upon receipt of English documentation by the certifying authority fully describing the certification standard. Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.59, "STEEL STRUCTURES," the second paragraph as revised in Addendum No. 3. |
||||||||
|
48.0 |
Regarding the AISC certificate, does the word "suppliers" in the second paragraph of SP Section 10-1.59 mean all the raw material supplers such as the manufacturer of the steel plate, rib, U-through, all other steel accessories (nut, bolt, shear stud), welding materials and protection materials? Or is it just the same meaning as the fabricators. Many Chinese material manufacturers may not have that certificate, but they are competitive and run a certified quality management system. | The word "suppliers" is applicable to fabricators and their subcontractors that will be fabricating any sub-components. However, raw material suppliers must be certified in accordance with ASTM standards. | ||||||||
|
49.0 |
How can we secure extra copies of the Information Handout (see Special Provision 5-1.13, PROJECT INFORMATION)? Only one set is provided to "prime bidders". We have subcontractors, engineers and suppliers who may need to refer to relevant parts of the Information Handout. Could this be posted on the Caltrans website where it could be available for downloading? Or could extra sets be made available for ordering, and if so, from what office? |
Copies of the Information Handout are available for purchase from Ford Graphics, 2210 Magnolia Street (near West Grand Ave.), Oakland, CA 94607; phone (510) 451-9060, fax (510) 595-2363. | ||||||||
|
50.0 |
A. Does the USCG permit mentioned in Special Provision Section 5-1.36 limit/affect the delivery of structural steel in any way? B. Where on the project site can the delivery vessel be moored? For how long? |
A. Yes. Please refer to requirements of the USCG Permit and SP 5-1.36 that require the free navigation of the waterway and timely notification to the USCG of any and all events that may affect navigation. B. This will be coordinated with the USCG when anchor mooring plans are submitted for approval. The BCDC Permit, Section II, N, requires that a U.S. Coast Guard approved checklist be submitted to BCDC prior to the use of any barges in the bay. If mooring of a vessel on one spot is to be more than six months, then the mooring needs to be permitted by BCDC. |
||||||||
|
51.0 |
Please extend the completion dates for each of the four Phases by at least one year (add 365 days to the working days allowed for each of the 4 phases). We do not expect to be able to complete in less time because of delivery schedules imposed by suppliers and other contract requirements. We also refer to Inquiry 6 posted on the website by another bidder. |
Contract time has been extended, please refer to addendum 7. |
||||||||
|
52.0 |
This bidder does not expect to complete the work for Phase 1 until the end of 2008 (due to the anticipated delivery schedule for the pipe beams and a variety of other reasons). Will Caltrans provide the F4 contractor access for cranes and laydown in Area FP, west side of Pier Cap W2, until this work can be completed (see SP 5-1.18, "Areas for Contractor's Use")? Unless the F4 contractor will have priority for the access in Area FP necessary to complete Phase 1, Caltrans should revise the date that the P4 contractor will gain possession until one year later. |
SP 5-1.18 "Areas for Contractor's Use" has been modified in Addendum No. 3 to provide the contractor access to Area FP until the completion of Phase 1 work. The bidder is reminded that Phase 1 shall be completed wiithin the time specified for Phase 1 work completion in Section 4 "Beginning of Work, Time of Completion and Liquidated Damages." Contract time has been extended, please refer to addendum 7.[Note: This sentence added, 2/2/2006] |
||||||||
|
53.0 |
Will Caltrans make more space available to the SAS Superstructure contractor at Pier 7 for parking, staging of materials, etc. as the Skyway winds down? It will be very helpful to receive approximately 2 additional acres for parking in early 2007, followed by more space after the Skyway contract is finished. | Substantial portions of Pier 7 will be available to the SAS contractor as the Skyway and E2/T1 contracts are completed. Please see Plot map titled "Pier 7- Area for contractor's use" in the Information Hand-out in Addendum no. 3 as well as Section 5-1.18 "Areas for Contractor's Use" of the revised Special Provisions in Addendum no. 3. | ||||||||
|
54.0 |
Will employee parking and boat access using the area available to the Skyway contractor on the north side of the freeway be available to the SAS Superstructure contractor after the Skyway is completed? Or will this area be completely occupied by the Oakland Touchdown West Bound construction? If there are available windows of time or available areas that could be used, please advise. |
The Contractor will have access via the completed Westbound Oakland Touchdown and Skyway structures commencing January 1, 2010. See Adendum #5 for details. Employee parking and boat access will be available to the Contractor at Pier 7. See Addendum #3 for available areas. |
||||||||
|
55.0 |
See Special Provision 10-1.41, TEMPORARY TOWERS, and the table contained in the fifth paragraph of the subsection "Temporary Tower Design." Please specify the edition (year and version) and the exact title of each code that is to be used.
|
Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.41, "TEMPORARY TOWERS," subsection "TEMPORARY TOWER DESIGN", the table in the fifth paragraph as revised in Addendum No. 3.
|
||||||||
|
56.0 |
See Special Provision 10-1.41, TEMPORARY TOWERS, and the sixth paragraph of the subsection "Temporary Tower Design" which states: "In case of a difference between the code clauses, the more stringent clause shall apply." This statement creates the possibility for confusion and ambiguity in interpreting design requirements. Does Caltrans intend this to apply only to a difference in clauses within a single code, or must all codes be examined to determine the more stringent requirement among all of the codes? Please confirm our understanding of the intent of the above quoted sentence, which is summarized as follows:
|
The bidder's interpretation of the various code applications is correct for the most part. Please note that as per SP 10-1.41 "Temporary Towers," subsection "Temporary Tower Design," as revised in Addendum No. 3, all connections shall be designed to be stronger than the connected members. Therefore, only for connections between rolled sections and tubular members shall the most stringent code requirements between AISC-LRFD and API RP2A-LRFD govern. Otherwise, the intent is to apply a particular code consistently to a particular structure/material type.
|
||||||||
|
57.0 |
Can Caltrans provide a Design Manual and a Prototype Design for a generic temporary tower (foundation, towers and box girder cradle), including all supporting design assumptions, loads, calculations and drawings? This will help clarify uncertainties in how to apply certain design criteria specified by Caltrans. To be useful to the Contractor, this should be in sufficient detail to address all design issues that Caltrans intends the contractor's designer to address, including preventing damage to box girders from seismic events and meeting all other performance requirements that are stated in the special provisions. It also must be supplied by early October 2005 in order to have any impact on Contractor's pricing for bids due on February 1, 2006. |
A draft prototype design with guidelines has been posted at the following website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/sasoutreach/. The draft prototype design includes two Temporary Tower design examples with various specification and code references. The draft design examples will be discussed at the November 30, 2005 SAS Contractor Outreach. Sketches (on 8.5" x 11") describing the overall configuration of the Temporary Towers have been included with the design examples. The design examples do not include a box girder cradle. Please note that the intent of the girder cradle is to distribute the reaction from the temporary tower so that the stresses in the box girder are less than those stipulated in the design criteria. |
||||||||
|
58.0 |
Special Provision 10-1.41, TEMPORARY TOWERS, subsection "Temporary Tower Design", states: "The total design settlement of temporary towers shall not exceed 25 mm." The design for settlement is part of the pile capacity and allowable bearing pressure calculations provided by the Department. Since the Contractor does not know the basis for the Department's foundation designs or whether those designs are adequate to meet this performance requirement, the Contractor should not have this design responsibility imposed on him. Please delete or clarify this requirement. |
Please note that the temporary tower design calculations shall show that the total design settlement of the temporary tower does not exceed 25 mm at the mud line for the governing design load combination. Field measurements are not required. Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.41, "TEMPORARY TOWERS," subsection "TEMPORARY TOWER DESIGN", as revised in Addendum No. 3. |
||||||||
|
59.0 |
Special Provision 10-1.41, TEMPORARY TOWERS, subsection "Seismic Design Loads," states: "The seismic performance of the temporary towers shall be such that the bridge superstructure is undamaged and not stressed excessively." This requirement should be deleted. It is impossible (and unnecessary) to design temporary works that guarantee a bridge and all appurtenances under construction with many intermediate stages will be completely undamaged after the design seismic event. The specification has elsewhere specified the required strength in the box girder during a seismic event (see Special Provision 10-1.59, STEEL STRUCTURES) and prescribed that the towers and permanent structures during construction shall be considered "essential facilities" per ASCE 7-95. These provisions are adequate to prevent serious damage to the girders. |
Please note that the temporary tower seismic performance design calculations shall demonstrate that the demand to capacity ratio of the superstructure shall be less than 1.0 during construction. Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.41 "TEMPORARY TOWERS", subsection "TEMPORARY TOWER DESIGN", as revised in Addendum No. 3. Also, please reference the response to inquiry no. 56 for comments regarding ASCE 7-95. |
||||||||
|
60.0 |
Special Provision 10-1.41, TEMPORARY TOWERS, subsection "Seismic Design Loads," states: "The temporary towers shall remain serviceable and capable of carrying the design loads." This sentence should be deleted or significantly modified. Normal design codes for seismic loading provide for collapse prevention only. Higher levels of protection for repairable damage, or for continued serviceability, are sometimes prescribed for lifeline structures. We note that these temporary structures are already classified as "essential facilities" per ASCE 7-95. But going beyond that to require serviceability for temporary falsework is an extremely onerous, costly, and unnecessary requirement. It is also arguably inconsistent with the specification allowing yielding braces and piles in concentrically braced frames (of course significant damage would have to be repaired as necessary to allow continuation of erection). The specification as it is written elsewhere is consistent with a "repairable damage" design philosophy, which is adequate for a low probability event. Please clarify what is intended. |
The Special Provisions require that the temporary towers be designed to remain elastic for all load combinations. Therefore, the temporary towers should remain serviceable (essentially elastic) after the specified seismic event. Note that isolation system may be used which will reduce the seismic demands (per Addendum 6). Also, please reference the response to inquiry no. 56 for comments regarding ASCE 7-95. Also, please reference the response to inquiry no. 56 for comments regarding ASCE 7-95. |
||||||||
|
61.0 |
Special Provision 10-1.41, TEMPORARY TOWERS, subsection "Seismic Design Loads," states: "Extreme fibers of the structural steel piles may yield to a maximum of 2% strain." This should be deleted as it is arguably inconsistent with other specifications and literature with respect to steel ductility in seismic design and other design parameters specified by the Department. If not deleted, please clarify what is intended. |
The 2% strain limit has been removed. Please refer to Addendum 6. The 2% strain limit is intended to allow for some minor yielding in the extreme pile fiber under the specified seismic loading condition. This relatively small amount of pile yielding is to require a design that would respond to the specified seismic loading in such a way that following such a seismic event, post earthquake checks would focus on the bracing as the structural fuse, and little or no concern would need to be focused on the foundation. This represents good design as the foundations would be difficult to physically access and evaluate following an earthquake. |
||||||||
|
62.0 |
Special Provision 10-1.41, TEMPORARY TOWERS, subsection "Seismic Design Loads," states: "Longitudinal and transverse static push-over analyses shall be used to verify that temporary towers capacities exceed the demands corresponding to 1.50 times the peak seismic displacements." This may have been added as a way to consider amplification of the ground motions through the soft soils for the towers in deep soils. However this will add a great deal of cost to the west towers on rock, which are not subject to this amplification through the soils. In attempting to simplify requirements, the Department has ended up with seismic loading which is overly conservative where the towers are founded on rock and possibly non-conservative where founded in deep soils. This bidder believes this approach is not in keeping with reasonable standards for seismic design. We do not believe that a highly complex analysis is required to handle the varying ground amplification at the different tower locations. We suggest that the Department delete the requirement to multiply displacements by 1.5 times and provide an amplified spectrum to be used for temporary towers in the deep, soft soils, whereas the existing firm ground response spectrum can be used for the towers founded on firm ground. |
The 1.5 factor for the push-over analysis is used as an indication of overall ductility of the temporary structure and does not apply to soil amplification in the Bay Mud. Please note that this 1.5 factor for the push-over analysis has been modified in Addendum 6. Per Addendum 6, the temporary tower structural system shall have a minimum displacement ductility of 2. |
||||||||
|
63.0 |
The contractor is responsible for the risks of tsunami and earthquake up to predefined limits (see the special provision relating to INSURANCE). But Standard Specification Section 7-1.165, "Damage by Storm, Flood, Tsunami or Earthquake," also states: "The Contractor shall bear the entire cost of repairing damage to the work which the Engineer determines was due to the failure of the Contractor to comply with the requirements of the Plans and Specifications, take reasonable and adequate measures to protect the work or exercise sound engineering and construction practices in the conduct of the work, and those costs shall be excluded from consideration under the provisions of this section." Available limits of insurance for design and construction errors and omissions arising out of seismic and tsunami events are far below the possible consequences of inadequacies for this major construction, imposing unusual risks on the contractor. Caltrans should absolutely cap the contractor's liability for seismic and/or tsunami damage to the work at $20 million. Caltrans should also eliminate the application of the second sentence in paragraph C of standard specification section 7-1.165 with respect to damage to the work caused by tsunamis or earthquake. Caltrans has defined the seismic and tsunami design criteria and should therefore assume the full responsibility for those criteria, including the potential for contractor errors that cause seismic damage to the work exceeding $20 million that are not detected during the process of the Engineer's approval of those designs and procedures. |
The Department will take responsibility for its design criteria. Relieving the Contractor completely of errors and omissions of complying with the criteria appears to unfairly burden the Department with quality of workmanship of design work and means and methods that it has limited control over. The Department believes that section 7-1.165 |
||||||||
|
64.0 |
At the Outreach Meeting of Aug. 16, Caltrans said that they made a full scale tower and miniature Tower, which are located in Univ of Nevada and San Diego. Will you bring these Towers to Pier 7 warehouse at least 7 - 10 days before the next Outreach Meeting, which is scheduled for Sep. 23? This will help not only Prime contractors, but also fabricators. | The tower models are no longer available. However, shear link test pieces are available for inspection by appointment at the Department of Transportation, Public Information Office, 311 Burma Road, Oakland,CA; phone (510) 286-7165. | ||||||||
|
65.0 |
We have purchased your official paper version of the Special Provisions, and found that there are discrepancies between the paper version and the electronic-file version on your website. In order to avoid unnecessary confusion by such different provisions, please indicate clearly the points of difference between these two versions. For example, we have found the following discrepancy in your document: Page 233, SP sub-section "Temporary Tower Foundations - Driving System Submittal", there are 2 paragraphs shown in between the paragraph "F" and the last paragraph. However, these 2 paragraphs do not exist in the electronic-file version. |
Please refer to the disclaimer on the front page of the electronic version of the specifications. The two missing paragraphs under subsection " Temporary Tower Foundations - Driving System Submittal," of the special provisions have been added to the posted electronic version of the specifications: The Contractor shall allow the Engineer 15 days to review a driving system submittal. The Contractor shall use the driving system and installation methods described in the approved driving system submittal for each temporary tower location. Any change in hammers from those submitted and approved by the Engineer shall also meet the requirements for driving system submittals. Revised and new driving system submittals shall be approved by the Engineer prior to using corresponding driving systems on temporary tower piling. The Contractor shall allow the Engineer 15 days to review each revised and each new driving system submittal after a complete set has been received, as determined by the Engineer. |
||||||||
|
66.0 |
We refer to the BCDC Permit No. 8-01, contained in the Information Handout and the approximate quantities and descriptions for "Temporary Bay Fill", "Yerba Buena Island Transition/Suspension Span" (Item 1.A.2.a of the permit). Please answer the following questions: A. What constitutes "approximately 1.60 acres of temporary, high-level suspended fill to construct portions of 'falsework'" and how is the area of the "high-level suspended fill" calculated? B. If the area of the "high-level suspended fill" is calculated based on the total plan view area of the outer perimeter of temporary tower pile caps in the Bay required for Contract 04-0120F4 and if this area is more than the "approximately 1.60 acres" described in the BCDC permit, what flexibility will be permitted by BCDC for a larger area? We foresee a larger area than 1.60 acres, taking into account the outer perimeter of ship collision protection. C. Is there any "falsework" for the YBI Transition Structures that might reduce the total area of "high-level suspended fill" allowed by the BCDC permit for Contract 04-0120F4? If so, what is that suspended fill area? D. What constitutes "temporary submerged fill for 'falsework' piers" and how is the total volume of fill calculated? Does the volume of water displaced by temporary piling and submerged support structures determine the volume of submerged fill? Also confirm the water elevation used for the volume calculation. E. What flexibility will be permitted by BCDC for a larger volume of temporary submerged fill for "falsework" piers? We foresee substantially more than 2776 cubic yards, considering the total submerged volume of all temporary tower piling and related support structures. F. Is there any "falsework" under the YBI Transition Structures that might reduce the total volume of "temporary submerged fill for 'falsework' piers" allowed by the BCDC permit for Contract 04-0120F4? If so, what is that volume of submerged fill? G. What constitutes temporary, submerged cofferdam fill and how is the volume of cofferdam fill calculated? What water elevation is to be considered in this calculation? Please confirm our assumption that the references to temporary, submerged fill to construct portions of two cofferdams are intended for Temporary Tower C foundations and that this volume of solid fill is considered separately from Item E above. |
A. High-level suspended fill is characterized as the area of the falsework that is above mean sea level and extends beyond the footprint of the new bridge (area of permanent fill). B. Bids must be based on existing permits. You may request changes to the permit and we will work with you in an effort to secure those changes. Agency approval is not guaranteed. C. No. D. Any fill below mean sea level is considered submerged fill and is calculated by measuring the volume of water displaced from mean sea level to the bottom of the bay. Yes, the volume of water displaced by submerged support structures is the volume of temporary fill in the bay. (Hollow piles displace much less water than solid piles). The Mean Sea level is at zero elevation per NGVD of 1929. E. See Answer B, above. F. No. G. Temporary submerged cofferdam fill is the volume of water displaced from mean sea level to the bottom of the bay. The references to temporary, submerged fill to construct portions of two cofferdams may be used for Temporary Tower C foundations and these allocations are separate from the 2776 cubic yards discussed above in item E. |
||||||||
|
67.0 |
We refer to the BCDC Permit contained in the Information Handout and requirements for Temporary Construction Access (Section H of the BCDC Permit) where it states: "Any fill placed for construction access and work platforms shall be pile-supported or floating only . . . The permittee is strictly prohibited from using solid fill in the Bay for construction access and work platform purposes with the exception of minimum amounts necessary of earthen fill to create the minimum necessary grade transitions from the land to pile-supported work platforms . . ." We interpret this solid fill prohibition to apply to construction access and work platforms other than temporary submerged fill for cofferdams and falsework (temporary towers) addressed elsewhere in the permit. Please confirm our interpretation. Installation of the rock socketted piles from floating equipment in the shallow water for Temporary Tower C is not practical due to the draft requirements for the marine equipment required and fluctuating tides. Also, the foundations are too far offshore, and the congestion around the Torpedo House is too great, for the piles to be installed from the landside. We assume that "approximately 12,072 cubic yards of temporary, submerged fill to construct portions of two cofferdams" are contemplated for this purpose (see Item 1.A.2.a of the BCDC Permit contained in the Information Handout). Please confirm that bidders can place this volume of clean, temporary, rock fill inside cofferdams for the Temporary Tower C foundation, which will be removed after construction. |
Your interpretation is correct. The solid fill prohibition is to apply to construction access and work platforms other than temporary submerged fill for cofferdams and falsework (temporary towers) addressed elsewhere in the permit. Bidders can place this volume of clean, temporary, rock fill inside cofferdams for the Temporary Tower C foundation, which will be removed after construction. |
||||||||
|
68.0 |
Please refer to the responses to Inquiries 1 and 7 posted on the website. Bidders should have access to the previous bid inquiries and responses. This relevant information should not be withheld from prospective bidders, even though Caltrans has determined that they are not valid and cannot be applied to the current advertisement package. It may assist bidders in formulating and submitting new inquiries for unresolved issues that have not been addressed in the current advertisement package. | The current Advertisement package (as advertised August 1, 2005) reflects the work as currently anticipated by the Department. New inquiries should be submitted based on bidders’ review of the current Advertisement package. The previous inquiries and responses are not valid and cannot be applied to the current Advertisement package. | ||||||||
|
69.0 |
Caltrans has specified the minimum design criteria for the temporary towers and the permanent work. Because the magnitude of risk faced by the contractor due to extreme events beyond the control of the contractor is so great, Caltrans should assume responsibility if those design criteria prove inadequate for extreme events during construction. Please cap the Contractor's responsibility/ liability for repair of damage to the in-place construction at $20 million, if the cause of damage was not allowed for in the design criteria and not attributable to the contractor (in the same manner that it caps seismic liability at $20 million). | The Department will take responsibility for damage "that exceeds the lesser of $20 million or 5 percent of the amount of the Contractor's bid for bid comparison purposes" in accordance with special provision 5-1.39 if the cause of damage is attributed to an occurrence which exceeds its design criteria. | ||||||||
|
70.0 |
There is insufficient material in the box girder steel plates, diaphragms, floor beams, etc. to support the self-weight of box girders during shipping and erection. They are designed to be supported on suspenders hanging from the cables. Any thickened plates and/or stiffeners to solve this problem must be removed according to the special provisions and prior statements from the Department and the Engineer. This approach increases the price and the time to complete the work. Please reconsider and allow more flexibility on this issue. |
Please note that all temporary attachments shall be removed from the Tower and Orthotropic Box Girder. This inquiry is too general as it stands and cannot be addressed. The Contractor is advised to provide specific details of what he has in mind in future bidder inquiries for this to be considered (the bidder should submit his proposal of specific attachments he wishes to leave in place). In addition, please reference the Special Provisions, section 10-1.59 "STEEL STRUCTURES," subsection "ERECTION PLAN," the eighteenth paragraph as revised in Addendum No. 3. Also, please reference inquiry no. 9 and the associated response. |
||||||||
|
71.0 |
Can Caltrans furnish bidders with a final design of the Skyway Temporary Towers AE and AW and as-built locations of the piles? If this information is not available, then please advise if anything in the Information Handout for the Skyway Temporary Towers AE and AW has changed or if it remains the same. |
Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 5-1.13, "PROJECT INFORMATION," subsection "STRUCTURE MATERIALS INFORMATION," Item O "As-built plans of temporary towers AE and AW," in Addendum No. 4. Please note these are "Approved working drawings of temporary towers AE and AW (Contract 04-012024)" and not "As-built plans" as stated in Addendum No. 4. As-built plans of the temporary towers and piles are not available at this time. This typo will be corrected in an addendum in early January. |
||||||||
|
72.0 |
Will the Contractor be allowed some flexibility to make minor design changes on the saddles, such as the height, width and divider plates of the trough/compartments? | Please refer to Addendum 5 for the Saddle Casting Performance Specification and "Alternative Saddle Details" sheets (790A to 790D of 1204). | ||||||||
|
73.0 |
The special provision WORKING DRAWINGS states: "Working drawings shall be stamped and signed by an engineer who is registered as a Civil Engineer in the state of California." How is this intended to apply to working drawing submittals for mechanical, electronic, elevator and electrical systems? | The mechanical, electronic, elevator and electronic drawings shall be stamped and signed by a Civil engineer who is registered as a Civil Engineer in the state of California. | ||||||||
|
74.0 |
Special provision CABLE SYSTEM, Erection PWS Cables, states: "The footbridge and the storm system shall meet the requirements of ANSI/ASCE 7-95"? While this code is relevant to loads, load factors and load combinations, it cannot be applied to the design of the footbridge elements (anchorages, support ropes, cross bridges, frames, walk surfaces and other structural members). Will the contractor be permitted to propose an alternative code for approval by the Engineer? If not, what code or design criteria are to be applied to designing the elements of the footbridge? |
The specified code is intended to provide loadings and serviceability requirements. The Contractor may propose an alternate code for the structural design of the footbridge and storm system, subject to Cal-OSHA and other applicable minimum standards. Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.60, "CABLE SYSTEM," subsection “ERECTION,” subsection “PWS Cables,” the first paragraph as revised in Addendum No. 3. |
||||||||
|
75.0 |
Is a storm system (see plan sheet 972/1204) mandatory for the footbridges if the contractor demonstrates wind stability for the footbridges using methods other than a storm system? | A storm system is mandatory for the footbridges. However, the Contractor may propose alternative details for the storm system as part of the cable system working drawings, subject to review and approval by the Engineer, to satisfy the requirement of the storm system. Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.60 "CABLE SYSTEM," subsection "ERECTION," subsection "PWS Cables," and Plan Sheet 972 of 1204 as revised in Addendum No. 3. | ||||||||
|
76.0 |
In the plan sheet 750/1204 there is a "hole for jacking rod" in Section D-D. How are these holes intended to facilitate jacking in a limited anchorage space? We think additional holes will be required in the lower flange plate of the suspender bracket for both the suspender rods and the jacking rods referred to above. Also, the nuts on the suspender socket rods must be adjusted in order to install suspenders or make subsequent adjustments. What does the designer have in mind? |
The holes shown in Section D-D on Plan Sheet 750 of 1204 are intended for suspender replacement in the future. While the holes are not directly suitable for load transfer to the cable, they may be used by the Contractor as part of his erection procedure (i.e. suspender shimming). The Contractor may propose additional holes, subject to review and approval by the Engineer. These holes must be closed later. Please reference Plan Sheet 750 of 1204 as revised in Addendum No. 3. |
||||||||
|
77.0 |
Please confirm that the Contractor is not responsible for seismic damage to work performed under other contracts (e.g., Piers W2, T1, E2, YBI structures, etc.) and that the $20 million cap on seismic damage in the INSURANCE portion of the special provisions applies to work under this contract (04-0120F4). |
The Contractor is not responsible for damage to other work performed under adjacent contracts that is proximately caused by a seismic event. For this contract 04-0120F4, Standard Specification Section 7-1.165 only applies to damage to the work under this contract that is proximately caused by a defined "act of god" if the work is built in accordance with accepted and applicable building standards and the plans and specifications. Section 7-1.165 does not provide a cap on liability for collateral damage to work under other contracts which is caused by acts or omissions of the Contractor. The Department will take responsibility for damage on this contract only "that exceeds the lesser of $20 million or 5 percent of the amount of the Contractor's bid for bid comparison purposes" in accordance with special provision 5-1.39 provided that the in-place work is built in accordance with accepted and applicable building standards and the plans and specifications. Note that the Department believes the temporary structure design criteria is adequate to prevent damage in a low level seismic occurrence. |
||||||||
|
78.0 |
Please confirm that the weight uncertainty that is contemplated in the design and that can be accommodated by the Alternative Camber Method, varying reactions at Hinges A and K, and suspender shimming adjustments allowed for on the plans, is as follows: "The design weights shown on the plans reflect the nominal values. It is expected that the fabricated weight will be about 3% higher than the weight based on the nominal values. The Contractor shall as part of his weight control plan, explain and document his estimated range of uncertainty between the actual weights and the nominal weights which may be computed from the fabrication drawings. Additional weight uncertainty beyond these measures is expected to be in the order of 1-2%, and is within acceptable design tolerances. If the Contractor chooses to fabricate the suspender before the actual weight is determined, then the Contractor shall account for the additional variation in installed quantities and fabricate suspenders with sufficient shimming to perform adjustment later as necessary." | This bidder inquiry is paraphrasing what is specified in subsection "Erection Plan" and subsection "Weight Control" of SP 10-1.59 "Steel Structures". The bidder's question is not clear. Please ask specific questions concerning the special provisions instead of rewording it. | ||||||||
|
79.0 |
Refer to plan sheets 724 and 725/1204, Crossbeam at East Anchorage No. 1 and No. 2. Please confirm that temporary holes to allow passage of strands, rods or cables through the crossbeam and box girders will be permitted to facilitate the indicated jacking requirements. |
The Contractor will be allowed to use temporary openings for the passage of strands, rods, or cables, and the suggested locations of such openings are shown on the plans. The Contractor shall submit his detailed jacking proposal to the Engineer for review and approval. Please reference the Special Provisions section 10-1.59 "STEEL STRUCTURES", subsection "ASSEMBLY", subsection "Box Girder," as revised in Addendum No. 3. |
||||||||
|
80.0 |
Please confirm that Caltrans will not perform any QA audits of the fabrication and/or erection of the TEMPORARY TOWERS. | Fabrication of the temporary towers will not require an audit of the fabricator's ability to perform the required work. In addition, the fabricator will not be subject to Department approval. The Contractor is responsible for the design, fabrication, erection, and maintenance of the temporary towers and shall develop and submit working drawings as required by the special provisions. The Department is responsible for the review and approval of the working drawings and for inspection of the work to verify that the towers are fabricated, erected, and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the approved working drawings. | ||||||||
|
81.0 |
Please confirm that suspender socket and rope strength tests specified in CABLE SYSTEMS of the special provisions may be performed on "virgin rope" before pre-stretching, at the supplier's discretion. | The socket and rope strength tests may be performed using virgin ropes. However, no adjustment to the test results will be permitted in consideration of the use of such rope in place of pre-stretched rope. | ||||||||
|
82.0 |
Regarding WELDING (SP 8-3), please confirm the following: a. When additional NDT is requested by the State, it is the State's intent to use the same NDT method that was originally specified. b. An additional NDT method may only be used to gain additional information concerning a questionable anomaly or in an area that is not accessible to the chosen NDT method due to geometry or other constraint. c. For a weld that only a percent of the weld requires NDT, the Engineer may select an area to be tested that is a different location than was selected by the Contractor on the same weld. |
When additional NDT is requested, it is the State's intent to use the same NDT method that was originally specified. An additional method may only be utilized to gain additional information concerning a questionable anomaly or in an area that is not accessible to the chosen NDT method due to geometry or other constraint. For welds that only a percent of the weld requires NDT, the Engineer may select an area to be tested that is a different location than was selected by the Contractor on the same weld. | ||||||||
|
83.0 |
Regarding the PAIQ, MFSQA and other bid submission requirements, please confirm that the Department is not restricting the ability of bidders to change fabricators and suppliers after bidding. Bidders may submit information for all parties contemplated, but bidders may also later change and use a fabricator or supplier that was not contemplated or listed in the bid submission. |
The Department is not restricting the ability to change fabricators and suppliers after bid from those contemplated or listed in the bid, except that such substitutions will be required to go through the audit process. Bidders should submit information for all parties contemplated. |
||||||||
|
84.0 |
Please confirm that the US Coast Guard only requires one navigational channel to be open at a time (see plan sheet 967/1204, Construction Sequence No. 1). | It is required that at least one navigational channel to be open at a time. Brief channel closures will be inconvenient to vessel traffic. Any brief channel closure needs to be absolutely necessary and it must be coordinated with Caltrans and US Coast Guard in advance. | ||||||||
|
85.0 |
Please confirm that vertical seismic accelerations can be ignored for purposes of designing the temporary towers, even though the dead load factor for the seismic load combination is only 1.0 and these structures are classified as "essential facilities" under ASCE 7-95. | Yes, vertical accelerations can be ignored. Also, please refer to the response to Bid Inquiry #56 for comments regarding ASCE 7-95. | ||||||||
|
86.0 |
We refer to Inquiry #2. The grounds that we propose to improve the partial payment amount to 50% of contract amount are as follows. BQ items listed in I through IV below are assumed to be supplied from foreign suppliers. It means these volumes are "materials furnished but not incorporated in the work". The total sum of I through IV is approximately 50 % of the previous bidding price. I. Full(100%) of bid amount for the following BQ items are applied: "FURNISH TEMPORARY TOWERS" "FURNISH SPHERICAL BUSHING RING BEARING (HINGE K)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)(TOWER)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)(TOWER STRUT)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)(BOX GIRDER)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)(BIKEPATH)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)(SADDLE)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)(PIPE BEAM)" "FURNISH STRUCTURAL STEEL (BRIDGE)(PIPE BEAM FUSE)" "FURNISH PWS CABLE SYSTEM" "SERVICE PLATFORM" "FURNISH SIGN STRUCTURE (TRUSS)" "METAL (BARRIER MOUNTED SIGN)" "STEEL BARRIER (TYPE 732 MODIFIED)" TOTAL I = 43.5% of the previous bidding price.
II. 80% of bid amount for the following BQ items are applied:
TOTAL II = 1.32% of the previous bidding price.
III. 50% of bid amount for the following BQ items are applied: |
See Addendum 3 for changes to Special Provision 5-1.25. | ||||||||
|
87.0 |
What scour depth should be considered in the design of the TEMPORARY TOWERS? The design criteria in the special provisions are silent on this point, but the “Hydraulic Modeling and Scour Analysis” report in the Information Handout and the API-RP2A-LRFD recommended practice indicate this should be considered. |
The recommended scour depth can be found in the "Geotechnical Foundation Report for the Yerba Buena Island Approach and Self-Anchored Suspension Bridge, June 2002" under Section 7 - "Suspension Span - Temporary Towers". Section 7.6.5 states "As a minimum a general scour of 0.5 m and additional local scour of one pile diameter should be considered". This report is listed as Item G. of the Geotechnical Materials Information section of the Information Handout covered under SP 5-1.13 "Project Information". |
||||||||
|
88.0 |
Epoxy Asphalt Concrete Surfacing is sensitive to temperature, rain and dew. The bond coat and paving that is specified can generally be applied within the specified parameters only during certain months of the year unless enclosures or other special measures are utilized. Please specify if enclosures are required or what other special measures would be accepted to allow paving at any time of the year. | SP 10-1.40 "Epoxy Asphalt Concrete Surfacing" does not require the Contractor to pave during specific times of the year. If the Contractor chooses to work at any given time of the year, it is the Contractor's responsibility and ways and means to ensure that working conditions as prescribed in the SP 10-1.40 are satisfied during the bond coat and paving construction. | ||||||||
|
89.0 |
Several experienced saddle casting manufacturers and fabricators and some experienced suspension bridge engineers have confirmed that there may not be enough information indicated on the plans to complete patterns and working drawings for casting and fabricating the Saddles (e.g., cable path through the tower saddle). Further explanation or additional information from the Engineer may solve this problem. Is this an example of the kind of problem to be solved through RFI’s and the working drawing campus during the early months of the project? | The saddle geometry is complete on the plans and has been used repeatedly and independently used to develop computer models and to-scale views on the plans. Please ask more specific questions if the bidder believes there is not enough information on the plans to complete the patterns and working drawings for casting and fabricating the saddles. | ||||||||
|
90.0 |
A redesign of the saddles (e.g., stiffener spacing to provide better access) may be required in some instances in order for manufacturers to produce them to the required tolerances and other quality acceptance criteria. Is this an example of the kind of problem to be solved through RFI’s and the working drawing campus during the early months of the project? Or will Cost Reduction Incentive Proposals be required before any design changes of this nature will be considered? | The purpose of the Working Drawing Campus (WDC) is to facilitate resolution of all issues related to preparation and approval of working drawings. Contractor proposed changes would be among the issues for which the WDC provides an appropriate forum for discussion and resolution. Acceptability of such proposals and the format of the resulting change order will be determined on a case by case basis. An RFI (Request for Information) is an informal correspondence intended to track requests for information about, or clarification of, contract requirements and expedite responses thereto. An RFI is not an appropriate format for proposing design changes nor is it a substitute for any contractually mandated correspondence or notice. Please note that the WDC does not replace the RFI process. | ||||||||
|
91.0 |
STEEL STRUCTURES (SP 10-1.59) under Erection Plan, paragraph J, states that changes to the erection plan based on measured reactions that vary from reactions provided by the Engineer will be paid as extra work. Working drawings and other elements of work might be affected if Hinge A is not available for measuring the reactions by July 1, 2007 and significant variations are eventually found. Should that occur, does Caltrans also intend to pay for changes to the work that are necessitated by variations in the measured reactions at Hinge A? |
The inquiry errs in its paraphrasing of the Special Provisions. The Special Provisions stipulate compensation for extra work only in the event that the Engineer directs the Contractor to modify the erection plan pursuant to the Contractor submitting measured reactions at Hinge A that exceed 2.25 MN. Such direction is at the Engineer's discretion. If the Engineer does so direct the Contractor, it is the intent of the specification that the Contractor be compensated for all additional costs directly resulting from approved changes to the erection plan necessary to address the greater reaction. |
||||||||
|
92.0 |
In what timeframe does the Department commit to reply to RFI’s that affect critical path activities, as long as the Contractor justifiably identifies them as such at the time of submittal? | The Department is committed to working with the Contractor to prioritize RFI's to facilitate responding to the most critical requests as rapidly as possible. There will be no specific commitment of time to respond to RFI's. The Department has established the "Working Drawing Campus" as defined in SP 10-1.16 to speed up both the RFI and working drawing processes. The campus has been very successful on the Skyway project. | ||||||||
|
93.0 |
The COMPONENT TESTING DETAILS (plan sheets 1162, 1164 and 1165/1204) specify a coefficient of friction of 0.05, whereas plan sheet 1163/1204 specifies a coefficient of friction of 0.07. While a coefficient of friction of 0.05 is sometimes possible under laboratory testing conditions, it cannot always be assured. We cannot confirm the 0.05 coefficient can be obtained until the prescribed tests have been performed. What flexibility exists if the testing results do not meet the friction coefficient requirement? |
All tests with acceptance criteria of max COF = 0.05 have been changed to max COF = 0.07. The lubricant shall satisfy the 0.07 max COF requirement for the specified tests. In addition, please note Plan Sheets 1162, 1164, 1165, and 1166 of 1204 have been deleted in Addendum No. 3. |
||||||||
|
94.0 |
TEMPORARY TOWERS, Subsection Temporary Tower Design, states: “Allowable stresses in the box girder shall not exceed the allowable values given in AISC.” Since AISC-LRFD (1999) does not use the term “allowable stress”, is this intended to mean “factored load demands shall not exceed resistance capacity”? Or is something else intended? Please clarify. | Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.41 "Temporary Towers," subsection "Temporary Tower Design," as revised in Addendum No. 3. The demand to capacity ratio in the box girder shall not exceed 1.0. | ||||||||
|
95.0 |
TEMPORARY TOWERS, Subsection Temporary Tower Design, states: “The design of the temporary towers shall conform both to the service load and the ultimate limit state criteria set forth in these special provisions as well as in the referred codes.” Are “service load criteria” intended to mean “serviceability limit states” as defined by AISC-LFRD (1999)? What “service load criteria”, if any, are to be considered when API-RP2A-LRFD (1993) is applied? Please clarify. | The service load criteria will be met by the load combinations specified in SP 10-1.41 "Temporary Towers," subsection "Temporary Tower Design," subsection "Design Load Combinations for Load Factor Design". The ultimate limit state criteria will be met by the specified pushover analyses, in subsection "Seismic Design Loads". Please refer to Addendum No. 3. | ||||||||
|
96.0 |
Under STEEL STRUCTURES, FABRICATION and ASSEMBLY, please reduce the shop size and tower assembly requirements to provide that one lift and a contiguous segment are sufficient for shop trial assemblies to check the interface between two lifts. The fabrication plan can be tailored to assure this is adequate for proper alignment and tolerances. | The shop size requirements have been modified. Please refer to Addendum No. 2. In addition, please note that SP 10-1.59 "Steel Structures," subsection "Assembly," subsection "Box Girder," states that the last segment of each lift shall be matched to the two segments that follow. The Contractor is free to match these three segments before he connects the last segment to its lift. This is consistent with the shop size requirements. | ||||||||
|
97.0 |
What is intended by the sentence under Box Girder Assembly: “This requirement shall also apply to segments shipped from the fabrication site to an assembly site where segments will be joined into lifts”? Does this require two shop trial assemblies of 3 contiguous segments at both locations or only one shop trial assembly of 3 contiguous segments at either location? | The intent is to trial fit between each adjacent segment, whether in the fabrication site or the assembly site. As per the Special Provisions, the preassembly procedure shall as a minimum consist of assembling three contiguous segments accurately adjusted for line and camber. Successive assemblies shall consist of at least one segment of the previous assembly plus two or more segments added at the advancing end. | ||||||||
|
98.0 |
Referring to Standard Specification Section 7-1.16, CONTRACTOR’S RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WORK AND MATERIALS, how will the Department apply the term “public enemy”? Does this term include terrorist acts similar to the World Trade Center or the Oklahoma City Federal Building, or does it only apply to nations and their citizens who are at war with the USA? | Attention is directed to addendum 6 which adds special provision 5-1.395 to address this issue for this contract. | ||||||||
|
99.0 |
We request the Department to reconsider the requirement under STEEL STRUCTURES, SEA TRANSPORTATION that prohibits erection of damaged lifts until after repairs are made. We believe it is possible to have pre-approved corrective procedures that will cover most situations, and the Contractor should be allowed reasonable discretion in the timing of repairs. If the damage is relatively minor, the Contractor in consultation with the fabricator, and after informing the Engineer, may decide that repairs can be safely performed in compliance with code requirements after erection. The delays and costs imposed by the present requirements are unduly burdensome to the fabricator and Contractor, and prices must be raised to compensate for these risks unless the requirements are changed. |
The damaged segments may be repaired after placing on temporary supports as permitted by the special provisions and with the Engineer's approval. The segments shall not be installed (i.e. connected) to their final position until all repairs have been satisfactorily completed. Please reference the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.59 "STEEL STRUCTURES," subsection "Sea Transportation" as revised in Addendum No. 3. |
||||||||
|
100.0 |
When constructing its mock-ups for the Tower Base, did the Department simulate all actual conditions, including welding processes and procedures, heat input prior to, during and after welding, the confinement of heat input within the enclosed steel spaces, the limited access on all sides, etc., that will be encountered on site? What was the temperature rise in the confined interior space relative to ambient air temperature outside? What kind of radiant heat effects did the welders or welding operators experience? What welding processes, procedures and equipment were used? Please be prepared to discuss or advise when the mock-ups are made available for inspection by the bidders and fabricators. | The Department has constructed no mock-ups of the tower base. The Department did have scaled down sections of other tower segments and components fabricated for use in testing, however they were discarded and no longer exist. There were no records kept of temperature or its effect on personnel fabricating the test specimens. There are no available records of the welding equipment, processes, and procedures used in fabrication of the test specimens. | ||||||||
|
101.0 |
The Construction Sequence shown on plan sheets 967-971/1204 contemplates that box girders will be placed on the temporary towers and/or trusses during interim construction stages without being attached to adjacent box girders. For purposes of applying Standard Specification 7-1.165, DAMAGE BY STORM, FLOOD, TSUNAMI OR EARTHQUAKE, please confirm that box girders will be classified as “in-place construction” and/or “incorporated into the work” when they are erected and connected to the temporary towers, trusses and/or adjacent box girders according to the approved erection plan. |
For purposes of applying Standard Specification 7.165, box girders will be classified as "in-place construction" and/or "incorporated into the work" when they are erected and connected to the temporary towers, trusses and/or adjacent box girders according to the approved erection plan. In reference to discussion at the September 23, 2005 outreach, please note that the special provisions contain a different definition of 'erection' for purposes of full compensation of the item price. |
||||||||
|
102.0 |
Regarding the WORKING DRAWING SUBMITTAL SCHEDULE (SP 10-1.18) and ACCELERATED WORKING DRAWINGS SUBMITTAL (SP 10-1.17), when the Engineer takes most or all of the allowed review time to review a particular submittal on the critical path and requires a re-submittal, what happens if the remaining allowed review time for that re-submittal is less than the 14 days required for WORKING DRAWINGS (SP 5-1.01)? Will an extension of time be granted and will TRO be paid if that is demonstrated to be the controlling operation and no “state owned float” is available to the Department to mitigate the delay? |
Section 5-1.01 Working Drawings states "After a revised set of drawings have been received by the Engineer, the new review time for that set of revised drawings will be the original review time, less the time already spent under review before rejection. In no case shall the review time allotted the Engineer upon receipt of a resubmittal be less than 14 days." An extension of time will not be granted and no additonal TRO will be paid to the contractor. |
||||||||
|
103.0 |
What constitutes a “submittal set” for purposes of partial payment under ACCELERATED WORKING DRAWINGS SUBMITTAL (SP10-1.17)? Using the temporary towers as an example, must a “submittal set” include working drawings and design calculations for all temporary towers? Or is the Contractor allowed to break the temporary towers down into a multiple, logical “submittal sets” for purposes of securing partial payments? A similar principle would apply to Integrated Shop Drawings, Box Girders, Tower, Erection Plan, Castings, Fabrication/Erection Procedure and Mock-Ups, and Cable System. | The term "submittal set," in the last paragraph of the referenced special provison, refers to a complete submittal. A logical breakdown of individually complete submittals may be submitted with the schedule of costs required by the special provision for the approval of the Engineer. |