November 19, 2002

CONTRACT NO. 04-0435V4
County Route: SF-80-4.9/5.9


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 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.

Total Number of Inquiries:162


Please verify Bid Item 225(F) FURNISH SIGN STRUCTURE (TRUSS). engineers estimated weight 128,590 LB. We are coming up with conflicting estimated weights.

Bid according to the plans and specifications.


This is in regards to the CD's that were sent out with the bidders plans and specifications for the California Department of Transportation Project No. 04-0435V4 West Approach to SFOBB. FCI Constructors Estimating Department attempted to view the information provided on CD form and we encountered the following problems:

CD1-Site investigation reports were unreadable when printed out. The same problems occurred on CD3-Geological Info and Foundation Recommendations. We brought this problem up to out IT Technician and he came to the conclusion that the information on the discs may have been scanned incorrectly. However, the information is readable on the computer monitor, but when printed the information appears half printed on each sentence. We have tried several computers, several printers, and also used another set of discs. Same problems arose as before. We would like to know if there is an alternative method for viewing this information or a possibility of receiving new discs. We feel that it is vital to our efforts on bidding this project, that we have access to legible information. We are also curious if anyone else has experienced this problem?

Your printing problems may be attributable to your use of an older version of Acrobat Reader. The Department has printed the documents off the CD's using Acrobat Reader Version 5.0.5, and has had no problems with the printouts.


When can we have a site visit?

Site visits are scheduled for September 2002. Click here for more information.


The numbering of the pages in the index plan sheets of the "Mainline Structure" sheets are incorrectly numbered starting from page 321 of 419. Please advise.

The incorrect numbering appears to start on Sheet 271 of 419 (1152 of 1511). The "Mainline" Index to Plans (Sheet 888 of 1511) shows a Sheet 270A, but there is no Sheet 270A in the drawings. This may have caused the numbering to be off by one sheet in the index.


As stated in the Caltrans Standard Specifications, section 90-0.01, the various strengths required could not be found in the project Specifications or Plans. Specifically, the plan sheets starting on 565/1511 do not specify the strength of the concrete for the Bayshore Viaduct Bridge. Please advise.

The minimum concrete strengths are given in the Gernral Notes for each structure. For the Bayshore Viaduct - 4th Street Retrofit the concrete strength f'c = 4,000 psi for the new concrete, see sheet 538/1511. The Concrete Type Limits define the type of concrete and limits for payment purposes and in some cases may also define additional concrete strength requirements for the various structure elements. If there is no strength given in the type limits the concrete strength will be as defined by the minimum compressive strength given in the General Notes.


"Pile Data" information appears to be absent for Bent No.2 and Abutment No.4, of the Interim GTR off ramp. Please advise.

Add the following note on Sheet 775:
"Note: For Bent 2 pile data table, refer to Bent 19U, Column 1 on "Pile Data No. 3" sheet (Sheet 905 of 1511)"

Add the following note on Sheet 781:
"Note 3. Column Bent 2 is Column 1 Bent 19U."


There are no "Foundation Plans" for the new or existing footings in the structural plans for the Transbay Terminal Ramps. Will these be provided?

The Transbay Terminal, the foundation plans were not done because of the fast-track design timeframe. The Design plans, as-builts, and LOTB's can provide enough adequate information for bidding and construction purposes. The limits of excavation for the different bent-footing retrofits are very simple. The spread footings (with or without tie-downs) consist of very small, level, and shallow excavated sites.


Interim TBT Off Ramp- Bridge removal sheet 806 shows 6 bents for removal on a TBT Off Ramp detail. The same page shows a TBT Loop detail for removal of 12 bents including one of the bents in the Off Ramp portion of removal. There are removal details for the TBT off ramp bents but none for the TBT Loop bents. Is the TBT Loop part of another bridge number or is it included in the Interim TBT Off Ramp structure.

The first partial removal includes 12 bents of the TBT Loop, so we can build the Interim TBT Off Ramp. This removal is being paid for as part of the Fremont Street Off-Ramp Bridge Removal Location A, since the portion being removed is part of the existing Fremont Street Off-Ramp. See Stage 1 Phase 2 item "C" on Sheet 576/1511. The Bridge Removal Location E is the removal of the whole Interim TBT Off-Ramp which occurs in Phase 4 item "G" on Sheet 576/1511.


Fremont Street Off Ramp- Sheet 576 shows staging of the ramp as does the Stage Construction Sheet No. 231. Notes on Sheet 576 indicate that in Phase 1, element P, "Temporary" supports (infill walls) are constructed however, no location is given. Sheet 231 of the Stage Construction shows the location of Phase 1 element "P" but calls it out as "Interim" support. Are the infill walls to be constructed as "Temporary" support and then removed in a later stage as shown on sheet 589? Please advise.

Yes, the infill walls will be constructed as Temporary supports as part of the TBT Off Ramp and then will be removed when we remove existing Fremont.


Fremont Street Off Ramp- Bridge removal plan sheets 587 and 588. Sheet 587 shows an existing partial off ramp at existing Bent 215. When you look at Bent 215 on sheet 588, the detail does not show any partial off ramp or the bent that extends over Essex Street. If this Bent is to be removed with the rest of the Fremont Street off ramp, should it not be shown on the details so quantities can be accurately determined.

The entire Bent 215 should be completely removed.


Bayshore Viaduct- 4th Street (Retrofit): Based on given pile Cut-Off and Tip elevation data, there is substantially more 30" CIDH pile quantity than you have tabulated. Please advise.

See Addendum No. 1.


Bayshore Viaduct- 4th Street (Retrofit): The data table given on Sheet 564 shows Type B DNRH soil from 0-10ft. below the ground surface. All footing excavations are less than 10 feet in depth, as per ground surface elevation data you have also provided. Why is the structure excavation quantity (for this specific structure) split between DNH and DNRH?

See revised pile data table in Addendum No. 1.


Drawing U15 and U16 (sheets 229,230) show the layout and typical section for the utility trench.  Drawing M4 (sheet 1325) shows the air and water trench requirement.  Drawing E8 (sheet 389) shows an electrical duct encasement detail.  Some conflicts are shown in some dimensions as well as backfill requirement.  Please clarify, on one detail, the requirements for the utility trench.

See Addendum No. 1


Reference plan sheet 1489 of 1511. Note 4 states to look at “Bent Table for dimension “L”, length of casing. Dimension “L” is not given in Bent Table.

Casings are temporary, and minimum casing dimensions shall be determined by the Contractor, and shall conform to the pile diameter shown on the plans.


Reference plan sheet 1489. On “Elevation” casing dimension is shown as 102 inch, instead of 62 inch.

Casings are temporary, and minimum casing dimensions shall be determined by the Contractor, and shall conform to the pile diameter shown on the plans.


Reference plan sheets 755 and 775. In the Pile Data Table why do you say “Above the Shaft” and “Below the Shaft”? What about the material along the length of the shaft? Please clarify. Why not state this material information as shown on Pile Data Tables on sheet 1303 or 1337?

"Above the shaft" refers to soil material above the pile cutoff. "Below the shaft" refers to soil material below the pile cutoff.


Reference plan sheet 1419 “Pile Elevation”. The temporary casing length is shown as 18” x 38’ but the piles are only 23.5 ft long.

Casings are temporary, and minimum casing dimensions shall be determined by the Contractor, and shall conform to the pile diameter shown on the plans.


Reference plan sheet 1399 “Pile Elevation”. The temporary casing length is shown as 18” x 38’ but the piles are only 28 ft long.

Casings are temporary, and minimum casing dimensions shall be determined by the Contractor, and shall conform to the pile diameter shown on the plans.


Reference plan sheet 895, Frame 8U (Bents 24U to 28U). These bents are shown on plan sheets 995, 998, 1001, 1004 and 1007. These pages indicate construction being performed in Stage 1 and Stage 2. Also, plan sheet 1020 shows construction in Stage 1 and Stage 2. However, Stage Construction 3, plan sheet 922 shows the North side being constructed and Stage Construction 4 shows the South side being constructed. Please correct or clarify.

On Sheets 995, 998, 1001, 1004, 1007, and 1020, Stage 1 should be Stage 3, and Stage 2 should be Stage 4. See Mainline stage construction drawings.


Reference plan sheet 905, Frame 8U (Bents 24U to 28U). Note the following:
Bent 24U; plan sheet 995; Column 1
Bent 25U; plan sheet 998; Column 1 & 2
Bent 26U; plan sheet 1001; Column 1 & 2
Bent 27U; plan sheet 1004; Column 2
The casing lengths given for these columns are longer than the CIDH pile length derived from the table on plan sheet 905. This means the casing would extend into the rock socket. Is this your intent?

Yes. The elevations in the given table represent the intended bottom of casing.


See plan sheet 564. Note the method of breaking up the pile quantities (and therefore, the method of payment) as shown in large Section A-A is different than all other piles on this project. Please correct to conform with other piles.

The pay limits are shown correctly on the plans.


See plan sheet 538. Based on the information in the Pile Data Table there should be some Structural Excavation (16”-42”) Piling, Type DNRH. The Quantities summary on sheet 538 does not show any amount for this category.

See revised pile data table in Addendum No. 1.


Reference plan sheet 1379. Based on the “Typical Section – Stage 1”, the limits of payment for the W18x76 soldier pile and the Drilled Hole are the same length. However, the quantities shown on plan sheet 1376 indicate different quantities for these two items. Please correct or clarify.

Bid according to the plans and specifications.


Main Line - Sheet 916 in the state construction notes, "A & B" locations refers to frames 7N, 7S, 8N & 8S. What are the letters "N" and "S" refering to?

"North" and "South".


Are these frame numbers used on the existing mainline structure?



For the Mainline structure the Quantities sheet has (92) PTFE Spherical Bearings required. If you add up the quantities stated on the Part Plan Hinge sheets the quantity comes out to (91) bearings. On Part Plan Hinge 19U the plan states (9) required while it shows (11). What is the correct quantity?

See Addendum No. 1.


Will CalTrans release the electronic plans now? Having access to these electronic files would be very helpful in the estimating of this contract. It would help to better understand the staging, interim structures, falsework, access, etc as necessary to submit a thorough and accurate bid.

Click here to view electronic plans and specs in Caltrans' Office Engineer's website.


Sheet 1083 is "Bent Cap Closure Pour Details" for the Lower Deck. Shouldn't there be a similar sheet for the Upper Deck? Sheet 1029 shows the cap at Bent 20 to be discontinuous between stage 2 and 5. But sheet 978 shows full height construction joints there. The cap is post tensioned. Is the cap continuous between stages or not? (Bent 23 is drawn similarly.)

All bent caps for the upper deck are continuous. See "Bent Cap Details" sheets.


Sheet 1020-1511 indicates that Frame 8U is to be constructed during stage construction 1 and 2. However, mainline stage construction sheets 922 and 923 of 1511 state that frame 8U is to be constructed during construction 3 and 4.

Frame 8U is intended to be constructed as shown on the Stage Construction sheets.


There seems to be a discrepancy of approximately 3,000CY over-run on the total concrete of the mainline structure. Is the interim column and interim supports included in the 43,900CY engineer's estimate on sheet 884/1511.

The bid quantities are correct as shown on the plans. Bid according to the plans and specifications.


There are conflicts regarding the Fremont St. Off Ramp Restrainers: Sheet 576 shows no quantities for pipe restrainers; sheet 625 shows a detail for a pipe restrainer and combination type; sheet 635 shows a detail for cable unit only; sheet 633 shows both pipe and cable; sheet 623 shows 4 ea cable restr and 6 ea pipe units; and finally sheet 884(mainline) shows all of the bid item quantity of 71,900 lb of pipe restrainers. Please clarify.

See Addendum No. 1.


Sheet no 997 of the drawings shows a table of temporary support loads.  Are these the jacking loads also?  If so, are the loads applied at the center line shown on sheet 995? 

Shall the temp support pick up the load of the adjacent box girder constructed in Stage one?  If so is the total load shown for the full width of section to be supported?

The load tables on Sheet 997 need to be deleted. Revised Sheets 1011A and 1011B in Addendum No. 1 give revised loads and clarify the required temporary support requirements.


The interim steel columns are 76 inches wide as shown on sheet 1229.  The total width available, including railing is only 7 feet, section BB of sheet 247.  The support will not fit unless the railing is stopped at that point.  Please clarify.

Steel plates or other similar method is to be used to span the gap in the barrier at the interim supports.


Ref Plan sheets 914,917,928,945,948 & 1014. Stage drawings 914,917,928 and typical section drawing 1014 show frame 3U being built in 3 stages yet bent 6U and 7U on plan pages 945 & 948 show only 2 stages. Does this work? Where are the other joints in the bents? Will more temporary supports be required?

A construction joint is missing and a staging line is shown incorrectly on Sheet 945. A bent cap closure pour is missing and a staging line is shown incorrectly on Sheet 948. Stage plans 914, 917, and 928 and Typical Section Plan Sheet 1014 are correct. No additional temporary support is needed, but the structure needs to be supported by falsework until the closure pour is completed.


Ref Plan sheets 895, 923 & 926. Stage 4 drawings 923 shows the southern portion of frame 8U being built. Stage 5 drawing 926 shows the southern portion of frame 7U built. Hinge 23U is a 2' open joint as indicated on dwg 895. How do we postension frame 7U at the east end with only 2' of clearance?

Table 1 on Sheet 886 indicates left end stressing.


Ref Plan page 895 & 1011. Where are the details of the bearings at the east end of frame 8U where it comes into existing bent 6? Is there any rework at the existing bent.

Frame 8U does not tie into existing Bent 6. Please clarify question.


Ref Plan pages 369, 370, 1378 & 1379. Plan sheets 1378 & 1379 show the First Street retaining wall LOL 2" in from the edge of the over hang and a wall thickness including the over hang of 1'- 2". Plan sheets 369 & 370 show the same wall LOL at the back of the wall and a wall thickness of 1'- 0".

The wall thickness is 1'-2" as shown on plan sheets 1378 and 1379.


Ref Plan pages 373 & 374. Section D on drawing 373 shows the tower at the right edge of the section as relief (2). Back Ground D on drawing 374 show the same tower as releif (6). Which is correct?

Sheet 374 is correct. Sheet 373, Section D should be changed to relief (6) for the tower at the right edge of the section.


Ref Plan page 1257. Section N-N shows 2" diameter cored holes. Where is this work paid for?

All 2" core concrete quantities for Mainline structure will be paid for as Item No. 197, "Core Concrete (2") and Pressure Grout Dowel."


Ref Bid item 189, CORE CONCRETE 6.5". This work is quantified by the engineer at Bridge No. 34-0126RL but we are unable to find any. Where is it?

Item does not exist.


Ref Plan page 1387. Section C-C and Note 2 indicates there is some refinish bridge deck work. Where is this work paid for?

Bid according to the plans and specifications.


Ref Specification page 142. A falsework opening is called for under the Harrison Street Off Ramp and over the Bryant Street building. Where is this opening at and how does it lay out? The same table also lists 2 pedestrian openings. Do we actually have to provide pedestrian access up and over a building?

The required falsework openings at the Bryant Street building are for vehicle and pedestrian access into the Bryant Street building, not up and over the building.


Ref Plan pages 775, 781, 789 & 971. We believe that bent 2 shown on drawing 775 and not detailed on drawing 781 of the Interim GTR Off Ramp is actually a part of bent 19U detailed drawing 971. If so then why is it shown as being demolished on drawing 789? Does it get build twice?

See Addendum No. 1.


Ref Plan page 1392. Section A-A shows some polyester concrete and Detail S shows a 2.5" neoprene strip seal. Where is this work paid for?

Bid according to the plans and specifications.


Ref Plan pages 1124, 1125 & 1130. On drawing 1130 Chart A indicates that Hinge 1L & 1U are to have 4.5" expansion joint assemblies. Drawings 1124 & 1125 show hinge and joint seal plate details without any provisions or details to install a 4.5" assemblies? Which is correct?

Bid according to the plans and specifications.


Ref Plan page 1465. The pile elevation on this drawing indicates there is an 18" diameter steel casing. Where is this casing work paid for?

Refer to Special Provisions page 265, Section 10-1.61. Last paragraph indicates that the contract price paid per linear foot for cast-in-drilled-hole of the diameter shown on the plans should include "casing and removing casing."


Ref Plan pages 576, 620-624. Drawings 619-624 show layouts and details for pipe restrainers at hinges 19, 23, 26 & 32. The engineers quantities on drawing 576 do not list a Misc Metal (Restrainer-Pipe type). Where is this work paid for?

See Addendum No. 1.


Ref Plan pages 661 & 670. Drawing 661 depicts 5 deck drains. Drawing 670 shows 3 deck drains. Do the deck drains at stations 51+45.00 & 51+55.00 exist?

See Addendum No. 1.


Should we assume that the Temporary Support at Bents 24U to 28U are being used to support the partial bent caps, after Stage 3 construction is complete, at Frame 8U North?

That is correct.


It appears that falsework for the Stage 3 cap will have to remain in place during Stage 4 construction (Frame 8U South), to transfer the cap load back to the Temporary Support. Will the not-yet-post-tensioned Stage 3 partial cap be self-supporting, and thus support the new bridge, cap, and live load, and transfer the Factored Design Load to the adjacent Temporary Support?



Are the factored loads on sheet 997/1511 the maximum load per Temporary Support that will need to be designed for?

The loads shown on sheet 997 of 1511 include the maximum factored load from both stages. Note that no live load is present during stage 4 prior to stressing the cap and construction loads have not been included.


Are these partial, stage construction Bent Caps self-supporting, at the end of each Stage construction, prior to post-tensioning after the final stage construction, to support the new bridge dead loads, and traffic/construction live loads? There is no mentioned of partial post-tensioning or additional Temporary Support in this area. We want to be sure the falsework can be stripped (Frame 7U, Stage 1 & 2 for example), at the end of each Stage.

Bents 9U to 17U require prestressing as shown on the plans during stage 1. Bents 18U to 23U are designed to be self supporting during each stage and require prestressing only for the final stage. Bents 24U to 28U are also self supporting during the initial stage. The falsework may be stripped at the end of each stage of frame 7U, stage 1 and 2. Construction loads have not been included and need to be submitted to the Engineer for approval.


Can the Bent Cap closure pours be completed prior to the 60 day wait period for the deck closure pour? Substantial additional detail for sequencing all the work in frames 6 thru 8 are necessary.

No. The Bent Cap closure pours must wait the specified amount of days before completion.


There is a major discrepancy in the quantity take-off for Drill and Bond Dowel (Epoxy Cartridge) on the SFOBB-San Francisco Approach, Lower Deck. CalTrans has estimated a total amount of 33 drill and bond dowels (epoxy cartridges), (sheet 1302). While still carrying out my take-off I have estimated there to be (1098 drill and bond dowel (epoxy cartridges). This figure was established by using sheet 1308, Plan and Longitudinal elevation and sheet 1309, section C-C, where CalTrans has indicated 2 rows for drill and bond (epoxy cartridges) #8 @ 18' in 12' holes along the total length of the soffit of the in-fill walls. Please confirm or otherwise correct amount of Drill and Bond dowels (Epoxy Cartridges) to be used for this structure.

See Addendum No. 1


It appears that the structure concrete quantity given by the engineer at the Lower Deck only include the in-fill walls concrete. Where is the structure concrete for the lower deck widening included?

"Structural Concrete, Bridge" includes the lower deck widening.


On sheet 1389/1511, Section A-A indicated that the anchorage housing is to be constructed during "stage 6." However, sheet 929/1511 shows that the housing will start during "stage 7." Please clarify which is the correct stage work will start on the anchorage housing.

The anchorage housing is to be completed in Stage 7.


Is the interim deck on sheet 1388/1511 considered structure concrete? The engineer's quantity does not seem to have included this in the concrete total. Please advise.

The interim deck is Structure Concrete.


Page 197, paragraph 5, of the special provisions states "The temporary supports shall resist the specified lateral design forces at the point where the column to be removed meets the superstructure."  The interim supports this purpose instead of the temporary supports.  Please clarify.

The same paragraph states that both transverse and longitudinal lateral load are to be resisted however, the load table provided on Sheet no. 997 gives only one column for "Factored Shear Force".  Are we to assume that this is the lateral load to be resisted in both directions?

See Addendum No. 1.


Paragraph 6, page 197 of the special provisions states the "The mechanical connections shall be capable of resisting the lateral temporary support design forces and rotational requirements shown on the plans."  There are no rotational requirements shown on the plans.

The term "rotational requirements" will be removed from the specification by Addendum #2. See Addendum #2.


Reference plan sheets 1221-1259 showing bents 43-51 and bents 1-5.  In order to determine column casing lengths, the bottom and top elevations must be provided.  These are not shown.  Also, the existing column dimensions (length and width) are not provided, making it difficult to determine the volume of grout fill required for the column casings.  Please furnish the data.

The interim supports are "State" designed columns that provide temporary support. The temporary support loads shown on the plans are to be supported by the Contractor-designed supports. See Addendum. No 1.


There appears to be contradictions in the special provisions regarding the disposal of piling excavation: Measurement and Payment(piling) page 263, last paragraph: "The contract price paid per linear foot for cidh concrete piling shall include......doing all the work involved in drilling holes, DISPOSING OF MATERIAL resulting from drilled holes......."

Note, same section, page 264, paragraph10:  "Cast-in-place concrete piling.... and at locations other than where cidh piling(rock sockets) is shown, removing and DISPOSING OF THE MATERIAL resulting from drilling holes will be paid for by the cubic yard for structure excavation of the types shown in the Engineer's Estimate."  The same discrepancy appears in the soldier pile item.  Please clarify.

Removing and disposing of the material contained in the drilled hole will be paid for as part of the drilled hole item as per the payment clause of the Special Provisions. See Addendum No. 1.


Please review pay quantities of items 221 and 224.  Our estimated quantities are 35% higher in these two items.

We are currently verifying the quantities.

Quantities for items 221 and 224 were increased per addendum No. 2.


Re: Joint seal assembly MR discrepancy, Bridge 34-0128K, Abut. 28 -

Plan sht. 662 shows MR 4" in quantity list, Abut. Section on sht. 667 shows MR 4.1", Joint Information table on sht. 676 shows 4" MR, however, that sht. is titled " MR greater than 4 in. " Also, there is no bid item for MR 4.1" . What is requirement for this joint?

See Addendum No. 1.


Ref: Bayshore Viaduct, Drawings 539-542:

Our take off for column casing weight for this bridge, paid in bid item No. 221, indicates a considerable quantity overrun. Please confirm the weights of final pay quantities for this pay item.

We are currently verifying the quantities.

Quantity for item 221 was increased 59,300 lbs per addendum No. 2.


Ref: Interim 5th St. Onramp, Drawings 1466 & 1467:

What is the correct steel casing diameter?

Casings are temporary, and minimum casing dimensions shall be determined by the Contractor, and shall conform to the pile diameter shown on the plans.


Ref: Interim 5th St Onramp, Drawing 1467:

There are 2 Shear Pins noted but 4 are shown. Which is correct?

4 shear pins is correct.


Ref: Interim Eastbound Detour, Drawing 1485:

Please indicate the 16 inch pile details located at Abut 22.

See Addendum No. 1.


Ref: Interim Eastbound Detour, Drawing 1489:

Sections A-A & B-B have two different rebar cage diameters. Which one is correct?

Section A-A is correct.


Ref: Interim Eastbound Detour, Drawing 1488:

Bent C Elevation shows "dotted" pipe pins but is not labeled as such. Are there any pipe pins required?

Yes. Pins are required. For Bent 12C & 14C, see Bent A. For Bent 11C & 13C, see Bent B.


Ref: Lower Deck, Drawing 1308:

Please confirm the number of doors required.

The number of openings are indicated on the plans.


Ref: Mainline Bridge, Drawings 1230:

In regards to the built-up columns at Bents 1-6, can the bolts or nuts be tack welded WFs to help facilitate in assembly?

We do not feel that tack welding the bolts or nuts is necessary for construction, however we will allow the tack welding.


Ref: Mainline Bridge, Drawing 1143 (bid item 224):

Our take off of the isolation casing is considerably more than that of the bid schedule. Please confirm this quantity.

We are currently verifying the quantities.

The isolation casing quantities were reviewed and the quantity was adjusted by 15,300 lbs per addendum No. 2.


Ref: Mainline Bridge, Drawings 1230 & 1246:

Not clear if "sandwich plates" at Interim Cols 1-6 belong in Structural Steel Item or Prestressing item. Please clarify.

The sandwich plate is considered structural steel.


Ref: TBT East Loop, Drawing 860:

We do not see any soil data for this structure. Please clarify where this data can be found.

Refer to adjacent Fremont St. Off-Ramp Log of Test Borings, sheet 647.


Ref: TBT Ramps, Drawing 840:

Is "catcher" included as a miscellaneous steel pay item?

The Catcher plates and the threaded rods used with the epoxy catridges to hold the catcher plates need a pay item added for the Transbay Terminal Ramps location Bridge No. 34-0119Y. The missing quantity is approximately 1400 lbs. This item will be added by addendum.


Ref: Bid Item 252 Misc. Metal Restrainer Cable:

Does this bid item include 8" standard pipe? If not, in which bid item does the pipe belong?

Yes. 8” diameter standard pipe is included with Miscellaneous Metal (Restrainer – Cable Type). [See Special Provisions 10-1.113, paragraph 1; Std. Specs. p. 75-7; and Std. Specs. p. 75-13.]


Please clarify "lean slurry backfill" at isolation casing on the Mainline Bridge (sheet 1143). Is this being paid as bid item 106 "Lean Concrete Backfill?"



Please clarify the intent of details shown on plansheet 51 (Construction Details, C-8) which indicate limits of structure backfill and AC paving & AB at retrofitted, new and demolished column conditions.

In the case of new columns (the center detail), the pay limit is indicated to extend 4' beyond the face of the CIDH pile; however this is in conflict with the pay limits indicated on sheet 886, which indicates a dimension of 1' from the face of the column (not the CIDH pile).

See Addendum No. 2.


If the detail of sheet 51 is correct, then is structural excavation also to be paid to these same limits?

In the case of the "retrofitted column" (the left detail), it would appear to be in agreement with the details shown on sheet 569 of the Bayshore Viaduct 4th St. (retrofit). The "column demolition" detail (right) is again confusing. The special provisions "Bridge Removal" (pg. 191) refers to Section 15-4 of the Standard, which indicates that excavation & backfill will be paid as part of the lump sum bridge removal items (15-4.03, second paragraph).

See Addendum No. 2.


Is it the intent of the detail (sheet 51) that structure backfill and excavation, done exclusively for bridge removal, be paid separately?

If so, what about the excavation and backfill associated with demolition, other than for bridge columns at abutments or for columns of bridges other than those indicated on sheet 51-53?

See Addendum No. 2.


Ref: Concrete Barriers, Drawing 1150, Detail B, Section C-C:

Under which pay item is this transition section to be included?

All transitions, end barriers, etc. shall be paid for as Type 732 modified.


Ref: Concrete Barriers, Drawing 1149, Transition Plan.

This section is between two type of Barrier. Is it to be paid as Type 27 Mod. or Type 732 Mod. Barrier?

All transitions, end barriers, etc. shall be paid for as Type 732 modified.


Ref: Concrete Barriers, Drawing 1151.

What pay item(s) are to include the concrete blocks shown on details A & B?

All transitions, end barriers, etc. shall be paid for as Type 732 modified.


Ref: Concrete Barriers, Drawing 1335 Showing 3 locations of Transition Barriers.

What pay item(s) are to include these barrier segments?

All transitions, end barriers, etc. shall be paid for as Type 732 modified.


On Drawing 231, Stage 1, Phase 1, item 1J closes Perry Street at 4th Street and 205' West of 3rd Street. Page 147, Paragraph 9 of the special provisions states "for all construction operations requiring the obstruction of a portion of Still man and Perry Streets, the contractor shall provide immediate through access, no less that 14' wide to all emergency vehicles during emergencies." Please clarify.

See Addendum No. 2.


Plan Sheet 587 of 1511 shows the limt of removal on the TBT Loop at exisiting Bent 39. However, Plan Sheets 590 through 592 show limits of removal for Bents 39 to 61. Is the section of bridge from existing Bent 39 to existing Bent 61 to be removed, and if so, under what Item ?

See Addendum No. 1


Ref Plan sheets 995,998,1004,1007. The center line of temporary support shown on these bent elevation drawings is supporting Stage 2 in all cases. Isn't this the wrong stage? The way we see it details will be added by an addendum issued prior to bid or a CCO post bid that corrects the drawings and appropriatly adjusts the contract price.

Pending Plan Revisions, See addendum #2.


Ref Plan sheet 1001. There isn't any temporary support shown at bent 26U. Is this correct? The way we see it details will be added by an addendum issued prior to bid or a CCO post bid that corrects the drawings and appropriatly adjusts the contract price.

Pending Plan Revisions, See addendum #2.


As of this morning there are a lot of unanswered questions. Many would seem to require an addendum. We formally request a postponement of the bid opening.

Unless an addendum is issued to change the bid opening date, it will remain 10/22/02.

The bid opening date has been changed to 11/05/02. See Addendum No. 1.
The bid opening date has been changed to 11/19/02. See Addendum No. 2.


Ref: Item No. 270, Description-Concrete Barrier, Type 60C.

CB60C (A75A) is a variable height barrier. I find no information in the Plans showing the variable dimension of the barrier. Cross sections are not available. How do we determine the needed information?

The dimensions can be determined by cross-referencing the information presented on Sheet Q-6 with information on the proper X, L, P, and SC sheets in the Roadway plans.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

Please specify whether Caltrans is requiring Work Comp, General Liability and Excess Liability to be covered in the CCIP or whether is it up to each party to provide their own coverage?

The Prime Contractor must provide workers compensation, general liability, and excess liability for all of its subcontractors, suppliers, manufacturers, and vendors who do work on site. On site is defined as all areas designated as within the limits of work as shown on the contract plans and described within the contract specifications.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

For the General Liability please specify what document or verification is required to ensure appropriate coverage from the bidders.

Please see page 54, paragraph 6, of these Special Provisions.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

Please specify the minimum Excess or Umbrella liability limit to use as it is not mentioned in the CCIP section of the RFP.

Please see Section 5-1.035 " Indemnification and Insurance " of these Special Provisions.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

Since the design has been determined by Caltrans, please confirm that Caltrans has the coverage/liability for Professional Liability or provide Professional Liability underwriting information for use in determining coverage and cost.

Professional liability insurance is for only professional services provided by and for the contractor; such as but not limited to preparation of shop drawings, false work, scaffolding, and other products traditionally prepared by a professional services provider. Professional liability does not include design work shown on the contract plans or included in the contract specifications; as prepared by the Department or its agents.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

For Builder's Risk coverage required, please provide direction as to the required coverages, deductibles and limits. Please confirm that earthquake liability is limited by code (7105). Please be advised that deductibles will be higher than the $10,000 required in the specifications.

Builders risk coverage is to be provided on an "All Risks" basis. See Special Provisions page 54, paragraph 2. The second to last sentence of page 54, paragraph 2 provides direction regarding higher deductibles. Be advised that the Indemnification provisions of Section 5-1.035 "Indemnification and Insurance" of these special provisions apply to all deductibles. In regard to the $10,000 deductible See addendum #2.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

Please clarify what property coverage is required for epidemics, quarantines, strikes, labor disputes, freight embargos etc. Please be advised that coverage for terrorism and acts of public enemy is excluded in all policies of this type.

See Page 54, paragraph 3 which requires the prime contractor to assess these risks and provide commensurate insurance. Be advised of the indemnification provisions of Section 5-1.035 “Indemnification and Insurance” of these Special Provisions; and that the Contractor is required to indemnify the State, including its officers, directors, and agents should liability exceed insurance coverage.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

Please resolve the conflict between the requirement related to Builder’s Risk stating "the limit of liability shall be set at the value of this project" and the following sentences stating "Higher limits may be obtained."

There is no conflict in this special provision section. The Prime Contractor must provide minimum coverages of the paragraph and may provide additional insurance coverage as deemed appropriate by the Prime Contractor.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

As to Force Majeure, what coverage is required? While the specifications state that the CCIP shall provides coverage for strikes, changes in law etc., no limit is stated – which is required to obtain coverage.

In accordance with page 54, paragraph 3, the Prime Contractor must assess the appropriate amount of coverage. Be advised of the indemnification provisions of Section 5-1.035 “Indemnification and Insurance” of these Special Provisions; and that the Contractor is required to indemnify the State, including its officers, directors, and agents should liability exceed insurance coverage.


This is a question regarding CCIP.

Please confirm that RFP spec does not require certain classes of subcontracts and material purchases and suppliers to be included in the CCIP, for example - vendors, suppliers, manufacturers etc. whether on or off site. On Page 54 in the Fourth paragraph - The spec states subs, vendors, suppliers, manufacturers are NOT REQUIRED to be covered by the CCIP for offsite Work Comp, Auto, off-site general liability. However, if they are not covered by the CCIP for these exposures - then they must meet Section 8-1.01 requirements and there is no clear direction as to for "onsite" workers compensation and general liability.

Yes, the Contract Special Provisions are correct. Under the circumstances and for the parties described under page 54, paragraph 4, CCIP coverage will not be required. On site is defined as all areas designated as within the limits of work as shown on the contract plans and described within the contract specifications.


Ref Plan sheets 1223. Where are the Interim timber supports on this drawing paid for?

The interim timber supports are paid for as Treated Lumber and Timber Item #233 of the Engineer's Estimate. The steel brackets and fittings are paid for as Miscellaneoous Metal (Bridge).


Ref Item 183 "Fractured Rib Texture". We are unable to find this work or a specification for it.

The item #183 "Fractured Rib Texture" is shown on the quantity decal for First Street Retaining Wall on sheet 1376. This item should be deleted from the Engineer's Estimate as the wall surface texture is being shown on the road plans as indicated by the note on sheet 1379 and is paid for as Item #180 Architectural Surface (First Street Retaining Wall) and these details are shown on the retaining wall plans, sheets #357 - 377.


Section 5-120, Contractor Controlled Insurance Program (CCIP), of the specifications, states that the program must cover suppliers, vendors and manufacturers. However, our Insurance Broker informs us that suppliers, vendors and manufacturers are not and would never be eligible insured under a CCIP! The CCIP is designed to cover all contractors who perform work at the jobsite. We strongly urge that the specifications be revised to reflect that suppliers, vendors and manufacturers are NOT covered by the CCIP.

The contractor is correct. The CCIP is for work that takes place only within the limits of the project / at the job site. The intent is to cover suppliers, vendors, and manufactures only while they are on the job site. For instance - assembly, delivery, or erection of products to the project site. See addendum #2.


The CCIP requires coverage for professional liability insurance for this project. We assume that the design of the project, as provided by Caltrans is not subject to coverage under the CCIP and only professional services which are required by either the general contractor or subcontractors are to be included. Is this assumption correct?

Yes, this assumption is correct.


With respect to limits and deductibles, the professional coverage is “per claim”. However, the specifications are written for “per occurrence” basis. The specifications need to be revised to reflect the “per claim” language.

See addendum #2.


At the value of this project, the Builder’s Risk specifications state that the limit shall be set at a maximum deductible of $10,000. It further states that “Builders Risk shall be provided unless such limits and deductibles are unobtainable at the time of coverage inception.” Our broker has checked the insurance marketplace and the $10,000 deductible for flood, earthquake and terrorism is absolutely “unobtainable.” We strongly urge Caltrans to review the required deductibles and consider changing the $10,000 deductible to those limits the industry will provide.

See addendum #2.


Plant Sheet No. 1049 shows Typical Section with a note to see “Road Plans” for retaining wall. Similar notes are shown on Plan Sheet No’s. 584-586, 663, & 908 for utilities. On Plan Sheet No. 687, Note #1 states “For road section see "Road Plans".” There are more of the same notes on Plan Sheets No’s 1304 and 1335. The “Road Plans” cannot be located within any of our sets of drawings and are not indicated in the Index of Sheets on Plan Sheet No. 1. Please issue the referenced “Road Plans.”

The term "Road Plans" or "Roadway Plans" customarily is a general reference to the non-structure sheets (Sheets 1-536 for this contract). For example, the note on Sheet No. 1049 refering to Road Plans indicates that the "R" sheets in the non-structure sheets should be looked up, the notes on Sheets No. 584-586 refer to the "U" sheets in the non-structure plans, and so on. Conversely, the term "Structure Plans" is a general reference directing the plan holder to the structural portion of the plans (Sheets 537-1511 for this contract).


We are having difficulty in trying to takeoff and verify the Roadway Excavation quantities since there are no drawings issued showing the temporary and final contour elevations or the construction and easement limits. Please issue any drawings showing the site temporary and final contour elevations and the construction and easement limits.

See Addendum No. 2.


Plan Sheet No 1337, Note 4, Item “C” shows (DRH) which indicates RCRA Hazardous Material. Also, the pile data table indicates the top three feet is DRH for the CIDH piles at Bent 8 on Fifth Street on and off ramps. There is a corresponding bid Item #101 for pricing the DRH excavation and disposal for those piles. However, there is adjacent structure excavation at those locations, which will also be classified as existing DRH material. Yet there is no bid item for this material. Will a new bid item be added to the bid item schedule for Structure Excavation, Type DRH for these areas?

We have revised the excavation quantities and items for 5th street On and Off Ramps per Addendum No. 2.


Ref: Item 167, "Prestressing (Location C)"

Special Provision Section 10-1.63, "Prestressing" indicates this item includes anchor plates and bearing plates. Are fabricated anchor assemblies also include in item 167 (i.e. Project Plan sheet 1248)? Please advise.

Yes, fabricated anchorage assemblies are included in the "Prestressing Location C" item as described in Section 50-1.01 of the Standard Specifications.


Specification Section 10-1.70 Concrete Structures

Mass Concrete mandates a maximum concrete temperature cooling rate of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit per day. This requirement appears to be based on a section of ACI 207, which describes the construction of large dams with cooling pipes located at the bottom of large uninsulated lifts of unreinforced concrete. The maximum cooling rate per day is not applicable to the piles and piers on this project as these contain reinforcing steel, which will have somewhat of a uniform internal cooling system. Even without cooling pipes, piers and subsurface piles will likely cool at a rate faster than 1.8 degrees per day. This same specification requirement was in the original pre-bid Benicia-Martinez Bridge specifications but was eliminated for uniform cooling pipe layouts that offer the benefit of rapidly removing internal heat and safely cooling the concrete to near ambient conditions.

We urge a review of the overly stringent maximum concrete cooling rate of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit per day and replaced with a more reasonable industry standard and/or removing any piles being defined as mass concrete.

The temperature cooling rate of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit per day is being modified to 4.0 degrees Fahrenheit per day per Addendum No. 2.


Temperature monitoring is required by specification on all mass concrete elements. Additionally, 10 thermocouples are required for each mass concrete element. It is not mentioned if all 10 thermocouples need to be connected to the required temperature logger.

For the Benicia-Martinez Bridge all mass concrete elements must be monitored, but only the first five of each typical mass concrete element must be monitored for the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span Skyway. For the piles of the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, one thermocouple is required at the centerline, one is required near the surface, and one is required near the cooling pipe. All are at the same elevation and must be logged. A backup thermocouple at each location is also required, in case the primary thermocouple is damaged. A few more thermocouples are required at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span Skyway.

Our consultant is not aware of any low-cost rugged temperature logger that meets the requirements of the project specifications and has more than 4 channels. Others are available that do not directly print, but are not low cost and are limited to only 7 channels. Others are available which have the required number of channels, but are extremely expensive and are not designed for use on a construction site. This means multiple data loggers will be required at each mass concrete element. For the project, the currently specified temperature monitoring will likely require one or more experienced people working full time, several dozen loggers, and miles of thermocouple wire.

We urge that the number of thermocouples per mass concrete element be reduced to a maximum of three (plus one in the air) to more closely reflect the type of hardware available and the ability and cost to properly monitor post-cooling of the mass concrete.

10 thermocouples are required and all are required to be monitored and the data logged. Please bid per the specification.


The specifications require that a California registered civil engineer perform many of the tasks and routine daily duties for monitoring mass concrete placement and post-cooling systems. Although some of the tasks are specialized, an experienced technician who is not a registered engineer could ably perform routine duties, such as temperature monitoring, without compromising the intent of the program. Other bay area toll bridge projects specifications didn't require that a registered civil engineer in California perform all of these tasks.

We urge a review of the requirements for individuals monitoring mass concrete and allow non-licensed/registered engineers or technicians to perform some of the non-critical tasks to reflect a more reasonable cost for the project.

The requirement is for the records and graphs to be signed by a California registered Civil Engineer. The intent is for the registered Engineer to ensure that the cooling system and the data recording system conform to the working drawings and that the entire system is producing accurate information. It will be left up to the Engineer of record to detemine if he wants to place experienced technicians under his responsible charge.


Re: Mass Concrete Definition
Project specifications indicate that all concrete elements with a minimum dimension greater than 84 inches are considered to be mass concrete. This is somewhat higher than that of typical mass concrete specifications.

We have decided on 84 inches as the minimum dimension to define the mass concrete elements. Please bid the project utilizing this dimension.


Re: Maximum Allowable Temperature Difference
The maximum allowable temperature is limited by the project specifications to a maximum of 68°F. We believe that this is a mistake in the specifications that resulted in the conversion of metric to non-metric units. Typical specifications limit the maximum temperature difference to 36°F (20°C). Note that a temperature of 20°C is the same as a temperature of 68°F, but a temperature difference of 20°C is the same as a temperature difference of 36°F.

The maximum allowable temperature difference (to prevent or limit thermal cracking) can be calculated using procedures outlined in ACI 207 2R-95 for a particular concrete element based on the amount of reinforcing steel, the thermal expansion of the coarse aggregate, the geometry and restraint of the structure, and the physical properties of the concrete. Preliminary calculations for the Benicia-Martinez bridge showed that using the calculated maximum allowable temperature difference rather than the 36°F “rule-of-thumb" reduces the construction time of some mass concrete structures by more than 50%. This can significantly reduce the construction time of the bridge.

Both the Benicia-Martinez Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span Sky-way utilize the calculated maximum allowable temperature difference rather than the 36°F "rule of thumb". We request allowing the use of a calculated maximum allowable temperature difference.

The temperature differential is being revised to 36 degrees Fahrenheit per Addendum No. 2.


Re:Maximum Concrete Temperature Project
specifications limit the concrete temperature (after placement) to a maximum of 150°F. This temperature limit is virtually identical to that of the Benicia-Martinez Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span Skyway.

This limit is based on the potential for delayed ettringite formation (DEF), which may affect the long-term durability of concrete exposed to temperatures above 160°F. Depending on the actual cement and cementitious materials, somewhat higher maximum concrete temperatures may be acceptable.

Please bid per the maximum temperature specified.


Re: Cooling Pipes
Post-cooling pipes are required by specification in all mass concrete elements. The use of bay water for circulation through the cool pipes is not allowed by specification.

In general cooling pipes are expensive to install and operate. In some cases, they are not necessary, The use of cooling pipes can often be avoided with the use of a proper mass concrete mix design, pre-cooling of concrete, and/or surface insulation.

For the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, cooling pipes are required in the first of each typical mass concrete element. If they are not utilized, and temperatures and temperature differences are not excessive in the element, cooling pipes are not required in the remaining similar elements. For the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span Skyway, cooling pipes are optional.

For this project, if city (drinking) water is utilized for post cooling, cooling pipes will utilize tens of millions of gallons of water to cool the mass concrete piles and piers Alternately, you can use portable chiller systems, however, this may not be logistically practical or cost-effective. We request the use of bay water for cooling and request that post-cooling be optional.

Cooling pipes will be required. The Contractor may utilize a closed or open cooling system. Bay water will not be allowed inside the mass concrete elements.


On page 276 of the Special Provisions under-"Mass Concrete" the use of Cast-In-Drilled Hole Piling is referenced as a typical mass concrete element. Is it the intent of Caltrans to require concrete temperature control measures to apply to piling larger than 7'-0" diameter?

We have concerns as to the concrete placement procedures, concrete flowability and subsequent quality control issues if additional instrumentation and cooling systems are added to the pile if they are placed in the center of the mass of concrete (in conflict with current specifications) and traverse the pile laterally. No mention of payment for the cooling system,engineering,testing,monitoring,reports,and grouting is made under section 10-1.06 piling.

See Addendum No. 2 for payment information. Cast-In-Drilled-Hole piles are required to conform to the concrete requirements of the Standard Specifications and the Mass Concrete requirements of the Special Provisions. Please bid according to the plans and specifications.


The use of synthetic polymer slurry is anticipated to excavate a large percentage of the proposed piling. Should the polymer fluid become contaminated by contaminated soils or fluids during excavation which was not indicated in the plans and specifications and require remediation, containment or special handling and disposal procedures, how will this additional work be addressed, identified and paid for?

The scope of this work is clearly identified in pg. 263-last paragraph of the Special Provisions.


We respectfully request a two-month postponement to the bid date, currently November 5, 2002. This is a very complicated project that requires additional time for understanding the construction details, construction staging, and specific contract requirements. Due to complexity of the work in this project, the bid preparation time provided is not adequate to analyze the bid documents’ details and requirements, prepare and review our estimate, and then submit a comprehensive and competitive bid.

If Caltrans does not postpone the bid date for Contract 04-0435V4, we may not be able to submit a bid on this important Caltrans transportation project.

Unless an addendum is issued to change the bid opening date, it will remain 11/05/02.


In what stage and phase will foundation pile 8U3 be constructed?

There are only two piles at each bent location in Frame 8U, please further clarify your question.


Please see Plan Sheet 1011B.  You are requiring that the temporary supports at frame 8U be capable of 18" lateral displacement, while remaining elastic, at the new upper deck.  Are the pinned permanent columns constructed in the second stage of frame 8U capable of such elastic lateral translations at the upper deck level?



Plan Sheet 884 reissued with Addendum No. 1 increased the estimated quantity of structural steel from 815,000 LB to 861,000 LB. The Engineer’s Estimate was not revised to reflect this increase in quantity. Is the Engineer’s Estimate going to be updated?

We are revising the Engineer's Estimate per Addendum No. 2.


Addendum No. 1 reduced the quantity bid Item No. 172, Structural Concrete Bridge, down 1,625 CY yet, the TBT-Turnaround Bridge was added to the scope of work, which added a listed 285 CY of structural concrete. We ran a cumulative total of all structural concrete from the given twenty bridge summaries, which totaled 69,326 CY and is exactly 2,000 CY more than the addendum quantity of 67,326 CY for Item No. 172. We ask for you to verify the new quantity in the bid schedule.

There was an error in the revised Engineer's Estimate that was submitted in addendum #1, the Structural Concrete Bridge should be 69,326 CY and not 67,326 CY. We will revise this in addendum #2.


Addendum No. 1 amends Section 5-1.25, Areas for Contractor’s Use, by stating "no area is available for the exclusive use of the contractor." Even though contractors are aware of the risks associated with damage to or loss of materials located in those areas, how can we not depend on the full access and area use of the properties shown on the drawings throughout the duration of the contract? This project will need all of the shown areas, and likely more for bridge falsework fabrication, fabrication of concrete forms, stockpiles for material handling/profiling, equipment staging, subcontractor staging, field office facilities, and employee parking, to name several. If these areas are needed by Caltrans for employee parking or lab trailer(s), we are certain it can be coordinated with the general contractor. There will be considerable cost if these areas are not fully made available to the contractor. This issue cannot wait for post-award discussions to occur in which to discover a portion of the identified space is not available. We urge that specific areas be identified that will not be wholly available for exclusive contractor’s use so that efforts can be expended prior to the bid to seek out other properties and additional costs can be identified.

The intent of the modification was to ensure that access is available to State forces for any necessary maintenance work on the structures. The Contractor will have full access and area use on all the lots highlighted in the contract plans pursuant to the terms set forth in Section 5-1.25 of the Special Provisions.


We understand, as detailed in Section 5-1.24, Hazardous and Non-hazardous Material, that the general contractor is responsible for the characterization and disposal of additional material resulting from excavations performed outside of the pay limits shown on the plans. Further, we also understand that the responsibility for additional acceptance requirements put forth by a specific disposal facility is at the contractor’s expense.

A. The same section states "the contractor may perform additional tests on the materials to be excavated, at his option and expense, for confirmation of the classification as RCRA and Non-RCRA hazardous materials or non-hazardous material." Other than the reasons for contractor generated testing stated above, why should the contractor be subject to additional soil profiling expenditures to identify hazardous or non-hazardous excavation when previous Caltrans testing has already identified locations and strata depths to establish pay quantities, some of which are final pay items? We assume that all Baseline characterization and soil profiling is complete; as indicated in the Site Investigation Report dated June 1999, the Addendum Site Investigation Report dated August 1999, and any additional soil profiling to classify levels of contamination whether in situ or in stockpile; will be performed by Caltrans. Is this assumption correct?

B. Special provision Section 10-1.44, Earthwork, states that RCRA and Non-RCRA hazardous material can be transferred directly from the excavation to a registered transport vehicle, a storage container, or a stockpile location. We assume that Caltrans will perform on-site soil profiling to determine if the net excavation spoil can be directly off-hauled by a registered transporter or must be taken to stockpile for additional characterization. Is this assumption correct? Are Caltrans personnel responsible to designate which bid item(s) excavated materials, hazardous or non-hazardous, are paid under?

C. With the contractor being required to safety train 30 each state personnel, how many people will be provided personal protective equipment and for how many work days? If decontamination of state personnel is required, how many individuals may we expect to average per day and for how long?

A) The Contractor is not subject to additional soil profiling by the State and the State will not perform any additional soil profiling. The intent is the Contractor "may" perform additional testing and profiling in order to confirm the classification or attempt to reclassify excavated material or as required by the disposal site.

B) The allowance for stockpiling is intended for the convenience of the Contractor. Hazardous and Non-hazardous materials are designated in the contract documents and will be paid as designated, and the State will not perform any additional soil profiling.

C) The Contractor should anticipate that the State will have two individuals per work day per excavation site.


TBT East Loop, Drawing 859: For 445 LF of 72" CIDH, you should have a total of 466 CY of pile spoils but your total is 71 CY. Please clarify.

See Addendum No. 3.


TBT East Loop, Drawing 860: To obtain more spoil data information, you refer to Hazardous Soil Classification Document but we are unable to locate the information there. Please be more specific.

In reference to the "Hazardous Soil Classification Document", please refer to the "Soil Analytical Results" in Section 10-1.44 of the special provisions. Specifically, you may refer to New Fremont Street Off-Ramp bents 28 -36 and Existing Fremont Street Off-Ramp Demolition bents 236 - 240.


Fremont Street Off Ramp, Drawing 577: Please provide the Abutment 24 pile spoil data.

The spoil data is already included with the New Fremont Street Off Ramp spoil description on page 214 of the Special provisions and it is covered between bent 24 and bent 25 according to the station of abut 24 Bus Off Ramp. The quantity of those 4 piles are very small and has been already included in the main quantity of Fremont Off Ramp. Contractor can use bent 24 or bent 25 spoil description as shown on page 577 of the contract plans.


Lower Deck, Drawing 1302: Shouldn’t the structure excavation (16"-42") pile spoils of DNH & the DNRH CY be switched?

We have made a quantity revision per Addendum No. 2.


Please See Plan Sheet No. 967.  The Sheet title block indicates the sheet is for bents 10U through 17U.  Hatching is shown at the bent cap soffit where temporary support is to be given.  Plan Sheet 1011A tabulates the required temporary support loading.  There is no tabulated temporary support load for bent 10U on Sheet 1011A however,10U is shown as receiving temporary support on Plan Sheet No. 967.  Please clarify your intent.

Please see revision to sheet 1011A in Addendum No. 2.


Please see Plan Sheet No. 1011A.  A previous bidder inquiry had asked if the "lateral loads" for temporary supports act in the transverse, longitudinal, or both directions.  Sheet 1011A again specifies "lateral" loads but does not specify direction.  Are we to assume that these lateral loads act in any direction?

Yes, assume that the lateral load will act in any direction.


Are core samples from the geotechnical investigation(s) available for contractor review?  Please provide all necessary information with respect to the review procedures, location, etc.

A tour is scheduled for contractors to view core samples at the Translab Core Room at 5900 Folsom Blvd. in Sacramento, CA. To sign-up for the tour and for more information click here.


Is the contractor permitted to perform his / her independent test drill at various locations throughout the site prior to the bid?  Please provide all necessary information with respect to the test drill procedures, location, etc.

The majority of State-owned parcels are currently under short term leases to various parking vendors and will not be available to Contractor for test drilling prior to bid opening. However, State will consider encroachment permit applications submitted by the Contractor for the purpose of test drilling on various State-owned parcels prior to bid opening.


The drill & bond Item #184 in the original plans state that the quantity of D & B is 11039 lf. In the addendum 1 this number is changed to 14490 lf. This is without explanation. I am wondering where this increase is coming from and whether or not you are rounding up on quantities that are less than a foot.

We are not rounding up on quantities less than one foot in length. The quantity change in Addendum No. 1 resulted from quantities that were omitted from the original estimate for the Mainline portion of the job.


Plan Sheet No. 15/1511 shows the location of the new 1st Street Retaining Wall and the existing crib wall at the edge of the 1st Street on-ramp. The new Soldier Pile Wall, from Station 40+78 to Station 42+30, appears to be in the same location as the existing crib wall foundation. A comparison of the Layout Drawings to the INFORMATION HANDOUT CD2, As-Built Plan #4002_012, shows that the location of the existing Concrete Crib Wall foundation and the new pile wall may be in conflict.

A) How can the lower portion (STA. 40+78 – 42+00) of the new soldier pile wall be constructed through what appears is the existing crib wall in that area?

B) To allow for complete removal of the existing crib wall, won’t the new soldier pile wall have to be constructed totally behind the entire embedment limits of the existing crib wall?

C) Is the cost to remove this existing concrete crib wall paid as a portion of one or more of the roadway excavation or structure excavation items? If so, what standard was used to construct the wall so an estimate of how many CY of material to be removed can be calculated?

(Parts A and B): In the area where the soldier pile wall overlaps the existing crib wall, it is intended that the existing wall be removed as required with appropriate shoring or benching prior to installation of the soldier pile wall.

(Part C): Measurement and payment for removing the existing crib wall is included in item #94 code 049038 Structure Excavation (Soldier pile wall) Type DNRH. See Addendum No. 2.


As indicated on Sheet 564, the Bayshore Viaduct retrofit includes CIDH that range from approx. 71 ft to 118 ft in length.   The existing structure imposes low overhead (generally than 20') and tight access challenges for this retrofit construction.  Note 1 of the details indicates "only one splice per bar in each allowable splice zone".  However, several splices per bar (approx 1 every 12') will be required to construct and install the full length reinforcement cages called for at this location.   Please clarify the construction details.

Multiple splices are allowed due to the restricted vertical clearance. The note on the plans states that only one splice per bar in each allowable splice zone, however the splice zone is not defined in section A-A, therefore multiple splices will be allowed.


Please advice us of a method of finding the column casing heights for the interim support bents 43-47 (Contract Drawing Nos. 1212-1216) and bents 1-5 (Drawing Nos. 1226-1258). Bents 43-47 specify a class “P” column retrofit which the casing height is specified per note 8 of the casing details (drawing 1259 of 1511) but the casings appear to be full height.

Column heights are added per Addendum No. 2.


Ref: BI 304 Isolation Joint Casing.

A) Section 10-1.925 of the Special Provisions state " At no time shall the superstructure be raised more then 1/4 inch above the existing roadway", page 1309C note 8 states " the existing column/structure will be jacked up a maximum 5/8" (enough to install the stainless steel plate)".  How far is the structure jacked, 1/4 inch or 5/8 inch?

B) What are the dimensions of the stainless steel plate?

A) The allowable jacking height has been revised to 5/8". See Addendum No. 2.

B) The plate is roughly 7'-6" x 8'-0" x3/4" in size. The actual final fabricated dimensions are controlled by the existing rebar as shown on the plans. The plate shall maintain a 2" clearance from the existing rebar as shown in Section B-B on sheet 1309A of Addendum No. 1.


Ref: BI 304 Isolation Joint Casing.

Sheet 1309A of the plans note "the stiffener plates and fins of the jacking platform to be welded after jacking."  Should the jacking platform be completely welded before jacking?

The fins and associated stiffner plates shall be welded after the jacking operation. The jacking platform shall be completely welded before jacking.


Ref: BI 304 Isolation Joint Casing.

Do the jacking loads shown of sheet 1309A apply to the jacking platforms shown on sheet 1309A or a contractor designed temporary support?

The jacking loads shown in the table on sheet 1309A apply to the jacking platform shown on same plan sheet.


Plan Sheet 884 reissued with Addendum No. 1 increased the estimated quantity of structural steel from the Mainline structure. This increase appears to be for the added high strength bars and moment assemblies at Bents 43-51. We assume all high strength "bars" and their associated anchor plates, bearing plates, anchorage assemblies and stressing are included in Bid Items 222 and 223, Furnish/Erect Structural Steel (Bridge). Is this correct? (See also Contractor’s Inquiry Response No 109).

High strength bars and bearing plates should be included in Prestressing by Location C. All other plates for Temporary Supports, Bents 43-51, are quantified as Structural Steel (Bridge).


Please see Plan Sheet No. 1257.  "Section N-N" calls for 2" diameter cores, to accommodate  1-3/4" diameter H.S. Bars.  Under what Bid Item is this coring paid?  Bid Item No. 197 is "Core Concrete (2") And Pressure Grout Dowel," however,there is no apparent Bid Item for "Core Concrete (2")."  Plan Sheet 1257 indicates coring only.  Please clarify.

A note was added per Addendum No. 2 to sheet 885 that states "All 2"diameter holes shall be pressure grouted." Therefore all plan callouts shown as Core Concrete (2") or Core Concrete (2") and Pressure Grout Dowel will be required to be pressure grouted and will be paid for as pay item #197 Core Concrete (2") And Pressure Grout Dowel.


Ref: Bid Item #216.
Fremont St. Off ramp (Replace) Sheet 596, 597-24” and CIDH pile #4 at 4”. Are these hoops or spiral?

The #4 bars are spiral reinforcing.


Ref: Special Provision Section 6 (subpargraph "A & B", section 2 addendum 1).

Addendum 1 now requires the 9 weekends to be consecutive. If we get the falsework up in the 9 consecutive weekends and then wait 3 weeks to grade the falsework because we want it loaded with girder forms and rebar, a standard practice to minimize joint takeup, will grading falsework at this time be considered part of falsework up? If so, would we be charged 1 or 3 disincentive deductions?

The nine consecutive weekends is the baseline for the use of the "extended weekend closure" traffic pattern for bridge removal and falsework erection. Therefore, the contractor shall not use the "extended weekend closure" to load and grade the falsework, but, rather the loading and grading shall be accomplished during hours allotted under the various other applicable lane closure charts.


Is the Contractor responsible for bearing the expense to repair damages to any portion of the work resulting from terrorist attacks?

In accordance with Standard Specifications Section 7-1.16, "Contractor's Responsibility for the Work and Materials," the Contractor is not responsible to bear the expense for injuries, losses, or damages as are directly and proximately caused by acts of the public enemy.


Does all of the interim structural steel get painted in the field?

Per the requirements of Section 10-1.98 of the Special Provisions the last paragraph on page 350 states "Finish coats will not be required on structural steel for interim structures." The interim structures will however be required to be cleaned and painted with a waterborne inorganic zinc paint per the requirements of the Special Provisions and Standard Specifications.


A) Although your answer to Question 145 states that the contractor is not responsible to repair or rebuild terrorist related damage, you still are requiring insurance for same, correct?  IF not, you need to clarify and restate your entire convoluted insurance requirements.

B) Additionally, will Caltrans set up a means of payment to the contractor for the extremely large insurance premiums caused by the CCIP provisions? 

A)Insurance coverage for acts of terrorism, acts of the public enemy and civil commotion are recommended but will not be required (see Addendum No. 3).

B) See last paragraph of Section 5-1.20 Contractor Controlled Insurance Program (CCIP) Specification.


Ref: Sheet 661 Harrison Street Offramp, Note (5), For Hinge 21 details, see "project 12" plans.
Could you clarify the location of these or what "project 12" plans are?

Seismic Retrofit Project No. 12 refers to the Mainline Bridge No. 34-0126 R/L.


Sheet 1144: Col. Shear pin design "B" #5 spiral x 2’-6" in diameters. Section b-b is #5 spiral 3’-0". Please clarify.

Sheet 1144 of 1511, Column Shear Pin Design "B", #5 Spiral x 2'-6" diam. should be read as #5 Spiral x 3'-0" diam. (Same correction on sheet 1349 of 1511.) Bid per the plan details unless you see an addendum prior to the bid opening.


Sheet 626: Extra added reinforcing at soffit access opening 4 - #6x8’-0". Does this detail apply to Fremont Street offramp only? The other bridges (i.e. Mainline) don't have this detail shown. Does standard detail B14-5 apply?

The extra reinforcing at the soffit access openings (4 - #6x8’-0") is required when shown on the plans. In addition, the requirements of Standard detail B14-5 also apply where indicated on plans. If the additional reinforcing is not shown on other bridges (i.e. Mainline) it will not be required.


Ref: Section 5-1.20 Contractor-Controlled Insurance Program (CCIP)

Vendors, suppliers, and manufacturers (all tiers) should not and cannot be covered by the CCIP. Unless they performed an installation or fabrication on-site, as a subcontractor they would be treated no differently than a Fed-Ex or UPS delivery. Please confirm that this is the intent of Section 5-1.20.

Yes - Vendors, suppliers, and manufacturers are only covered by the CCIP when they are delivering, installing, or fabricating their work on the job site. Delivery services such as Fed-Ex or UPS would be covered under their own insurance as well as the general liability requirements of the contract.


Ref: Section 5-1.20 Contractor-Controlled Insurance Program (CCIP)

Haz-mat haulers will be required to provide the contractor with indemnification during their haul and transport phase. (Such is common insurance practice since the haulers are already insured.) Please confirm that this will be acceptable!

Redundant insurance for the Haz-mat hauler and the Contractor will not be required during Haz-mat haul and transportation whether on or off the job site. Yes, it is acceptable to have Haz-mat haulers provide their own insurance during their haul and transport phase. The environmental liability insurance must cover Haz-mat work as it occurs at the job site.


Ref: Section 5-1.20 Contractor-Controlled Insurance Program (CCIP)

Builder’s Risk is obtainable, however it is not economically feasible and may not be obtainable for full contract value for the following items:
a. Acts of Terrorism, Act of the public enemy
b. Earthquake
c. Freight embargoes
d. Force Majeure
It is simply unreasonable to include Earthquake in this program and it should be excluded entirely. If a bidder is unable to obtain Builder’s Risk at the current imposed limits, or newly established limits, is the bidder’s bid considered to be non-responsive?

Builders risk insurance is required under the sixth paragraph of the Section 5-1.20 Contractor Controlled Insurance Program Specification. Insurance coverage for acts of terrorism, acts of the public enemy, and civil commotion are recommended but will not be required (see addendum 3). Liability for tsunamis and earthquake is limited by Section 7-1.165 "Damage by Storm, Flood, Tidal Wave or Earthquake", therefore insurance coverage must only cover the Contractor's financial obligation for tsunamis and earthquake. Failure to provide builders risk insurance in the amounts and deductibles required will cause the bidder's proposal to be considered non-responsive. Under the seventh paragraph of the Section 5-1.20 Contractor Controlled Insurance Program Specification, the Contractor is required to provide insurance coverage for events related to force majeure, transportation delays, strikes, changes in law, and acts of subcontractors, suppliers, manufacturers, and vendors within the liability and deductible amount the Contractor/Joint Venture deems appropriate for this contract. The State strongly suggests that the Contractor obtain these types of insurance. The Contractor is required to indemnify the State should these levels of insurance be inadequate to cover claims associated with this project, even if that means some or all of the Contractors assets must be liquidated to fulfill this indemnification requirement. Therefore, the Contractor must evaluate its level of risk tolerance and set the level and amounts of these insurances on that basis. Since the Contractor sets the level and amounts of insurance required by paragraph seven of this contract special provision, the bidder's proposal would not be considered non-responsive.


Reference Drawing U-16 (Sheet No. 230), utility trench section.
  Under what pay item is the electrical duct within the trench paid for?

The electrical duct within the trench is paid for under the lump sum for item 293, item code 024349, TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SYSTEM, as shown on sheet 389.


On the CD-ROM under Site Inv Report (June '99), the Table of Contents refers to a total of 34 tables. However, as you scroll through the actual tables, several are missing (Table 2, 5, 7, 8,and 16). Can you provide the missing tables?

Table 2 (0.7 meg), Table 5 (1.3 meg), Table 7 (49k), Table 8 (66k), and Table 16 (5 meg) are posted in the internet.Click on the appropriate table to view or download. Right-click here to download all of the tables (11 meg).

The following tables have also been posted on the web for viewing or download. Table 9 (0.5 meg), Table 15 (2.2 meg), and Table 29 (1.8 meg).


In response to your inquiry number 153 regarding the Contractor Controlled Insurance Program (CCIP), we must have a clarification as to the limit of damages under all the issues that are being placed within the contractors insurance program that the damages associated herewith would only be those suffered by the contractor, their subs and suppliers and would of course not include any damages, delays or costs of administration suffered by CalTrans and or the public. We cannot insure nor cover the costs associated with anything outside of the general contractor, his subs and suppliers. That must be clarified and confirmed prior bid.

Section 5-1.035 INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE; subsection 7-1.122A(3) liability Limits/Additional Insureds of these Special Provisions require that the Contractor provide additional insurance as follows, “The State and the Department, including their officers, directors, agents (excluding agents who are design professionals), and State employees, shall be named as additional insureds under the General Liability and Umbrella Liability Policies with respect to liability arising out of or connected with work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor under this contract.” Also per subsection 7-1.121 Indemnification; the Contractor is required to indemnify the State including its officers, directors, and agents should liability exceed insurance.


You must understand there is no possible insurance available for the following: "Events related to force majeure, transportation delays, strikes and changes in law."

Attached is a letter from our insurance carrier documenting that the insurance CalTrans has suggested the bidders secure is unobtainable in the current market. Therefor, if insurance is unobtainable for the above-mentioned items they must be removed by addendum. The limits of potential risk for all these items is very difficult to assess by even the idea of placing the responsibility for legislative risk on the general contractor, i.e. changes in law, is unacceptable. How could a general contractor possible be responsible for the acts of the legislature be it California or the Federal government after he bids the project? This goes against everything proper in contracting administration and has never heretofore been discussed on even contemplated on a public works contract. Again the bidder’s exposure to these specific risks should be eliminated.

The bidder deems the appropriate amount of coverage for these types of insurance, so if coverage is indeed unobtainable in the current market the bidder’s proposal will not be considered non-responsive.

In regard to changes in law; section 7-1.01 Laws to be Observed of the Standard Specifications require the Contractor keep himself fully informed of all existing and future State and Federal Laws. He shall at all times observe and comply with all such existing and future laws.


Since the majority of the CCIP costs will become due at the project inception, a separate bid item should be established to manage and fund the CCIP. It is unrealistic to administer the CCIP within the "time related overhead item of work" as you have directed.

A separate bid item will not be established. All costs associated with CCIP development and implementation shall be considered to be included in the time related overhead item of work.


I have a question regarding permanent tiedown anchors on contract 04-0435V4. This job is bidding 11/19/02. The description is 04-SF-80-4.9/5.9. My question is in regard to the stressing notes on sheet 843 of the plans and the first sentence in the Materials section of the special provisions on page 269. Both reference the ultimate strength of the prestressing steel being 150 ksi for both strand anchors and bar anchors. We are a ground anchor manufacturer. We specialize in 0.6" HDPE grease extruded strand. The ultimate stress for 0.6" strand is 270 ksi. How should we proceed with our proposal to supply strand that will fulfill this portion of the contract? Thank you for your consideration.

There appears to be a discrepancy in the plans and Special Provisions. Since the bid opening date is Tuesday, it is unlikely that an addendum will be issued. Please bid the project per the contract plans and special provisions.


Addendum No. 2 revises the Small Business Goal and Reporting specification to identify a 10% SBE goal for this project. Is the Contractor required to document a good faith effort for SBE participation, and will the percentage of participation be utilized to determine the lowest responsive bidder?

The Department has established a 10 percent goal for small business in this contract. The contractor shall list the names of all the small businesses to be used on the contract on the form provided. The Department will not evaluate the contractor's good faith effort. For this contract, the Department will review the listed small businesses and determine if the goal was met.


In the Special Provisions, Section 10-1.39 Bridge Removal,Paragraph 13 states "The bridge removal plan shall be furnished for all bridge removal locations and shall include the following...etc." The last paragraphs of this section includes a table of review time for specific structures. Are we to assume that a bridge removal plan and on-site registered engineer is required for all bridge removal locations, including interim structures, or is the requirement for only those specific structures listed in the table?

A bridge removal plan is required for all bridges to be removed. As stated the working drawings must conform to the requirements of Section 51-1.06A "Falsework Design and Drawings". The table referenced by the bidder indicates the required review time that exceeds three weeks for review of the working drawings. If a structure is not listed for review time in the table the review time is 3 weeks as defined in the Special Provisions Section 10-1.70 "Concrete Structure" Sub heading "Falsework" that amends Section 51-1.06A "Falsework Design and Drawings" on page 279 of the Special Provisions.


You answer to Inquiry No. 113 appears to conflict with the definition presented in the Special Provisions where a CIDH mass concrete element is defined as having a minimum dimension GREATER THAN (as opposed to greater than or equal to) 84" in diameter.  Please clarify whether or not an 84" diameter CIDH is considered a mass concrete element subject to the cooling and monitoring requirements as outlined.  The costs associated with including or excluding the 84" CIDH piles is considerable.

Per the Special Provisions, a CIDH mass concrete element is defined as having a minimum dimension that exceeds 7 feet.