Viewing inquiries for 11-056324

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: Bid item 90, Mechanically Stabilized Embankment, Location A
Bid item 91, Mechanically Stabilized Embankment, Location B

SP Sx 47-6.01A: Alternative Earth Retaining Systems - All of the walls in table of 47-6.01A have an aesthetically pleasing, hard surface concrete, facing except the first one in the list (Welded Wire Wall by Hilfiker). Since these walls will be in public view, it appears that the Welded Wire Wall System should not be included in the list. Please eliminate it from the list.

Inquiry submitted 07/05/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/05/2013


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum 2 for updated alternative earth retaining system table.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #2: E-51 & E-52 Gives reference for future cctv by others. What Labor and Equipment are provided by others. What should be excluded on this bid. It is not clear what the contractor needs to furnish and install.
Inquiry submitted 07/09/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/12/2013


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum 2 for replacement project plan sheets.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #3: It shows a State furnished cabinet on E-36 and then nothing for the one shown on E-37. Can we get a list of all state-furnished material?
Inquiry submitted 07/09/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/09/2013


Response #2:Examples of Department-furnished material indicated in the Contract include Standard Specifications (including section 6-2.03 and section 86), plans (including "Closed Circuit Television Circuit (Electrical Details)"), and special provisions (including section 6 and section 86-5.01G(2)).
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #4: Sheet E-23 There is a cabinet shown. Who is providing this cabinet? Is it state-furnished?
Inquiry submitted 07/09/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/09/2013


Response #2:The cabinet on E-23 is being provided by the contractor.
Response posted 07/12/2013




Inquiry #5: Reference Special Provision Section 19-6.03D. Our understanding is that the Surcharge height and period is the MSE wall and fill to the grading plane prior to placement of the structural section above these fill zones.
Inquiry submitted 07/29/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/29/2013


Response #2:The grading plane is the subgrade of the MSE wall concrete barrier slab and subgrade of the adjacent structural section. Once the MSE walls are backfilled to the grading plane, and accepted by the Engineer, the settlement period will begin.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #6: Reference sheet 598 Detail B11-56. Please show further detail on how the pavement reinforcing fabric is to be placed in the JPCP.
Inquiry submitted 07/30/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/30/2013


Response #2:
Response posted 07/30/2013


Response #3:Please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 08/05/2013


Response #4:Please refer to Addendum 2, paving notch and pavement reinforcing fabric was removed. Please refer to revised plan sheets 598 and 618 of Addendum No. 2, dated August 23, 2013.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #7: Drawing C-9 Note 1 states Remove highly expansive soils and replace expansive material with Class V aggregate sub base. The minimum depth of removal will vary but will not exceed 5’ below the bottom of the pavement structural section. The details on drawing C-9 state that a maximum of 5’ of Class V base will be placed under the pavement structural section is there a minimum required thickness of the Class V aggregate base?
Inquiry submitted 08/07/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/07/2013


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum 2, revised construction detail sheet C-9
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #8: Drawing C-9 Note 2 states that where highly expansive materials are not know to be present, remove the upper 24” of near surface soils, clarify and recompact the next lower 12” to 90%. Is it the owner’s intent to have the contractor dispose of that top 24” or can they recompact the 24” of material previously over excavated?
Inquiry submitted 08/07/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/07/2013


Response #2:Upper 24” can be reused and recompacted as embankment.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #9: Please provide cross sections for the following lines: SE, WN, EN, AR1, AR2, AR3, AR4, AR5
Inquiry submitted 08/07/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/07/2013


Response #2:Please see the links below for additional cross sections:

11-056321-A1Pt1_A1Pt2_XS.pdf

11-056321-AR1_XS.pdf

11-056321-AR2_XS.pdf


11-056321-AR3_AR4_XS.pdf

11-056321-AR5_XS.pdf

11-056321-E6L_XS.pdf

11-056321-EB_EN_XS.pdf

11-056321-LMR_XS.pdf

11-056321-SE_XS.pdf

11-056321-TEMPSWALE_XS.pdf

11-056321-WB_XS.pdf

11-056321-WN_XS.pdf






Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #10: DQ 1 shows a note on the Alternative Pipe Culvert stating “Special Case for all Chloride Resistant RCP”. We would like to know what this means and if it only applies to the APC portion of the job or does the rest of the RCP needs it?

Would the engineer be open to use Waterproof Mixtures as in the case of XYPEX, ConSeal or any other mixture to keep away contaminated soil?

The plans show some of the APC to be watertight joints are the rest of the RCP to be non-water tight joints?

In regards to the 84” is it Water tight joints? Will 15” Wall be Ok to use? The Steel areas per plan DD-12 show 1 1/5” Clear Cover on the Steel only on the Outside and not the inside? Stirrups only at invert?


Inquiry submitted 08/12/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/13/2013


Response #2:1. Applies only to APC

2. No

3. See drainage quantity sheets for pipe joint type.

4. See drainage quantity sheets for pipe joint type. Sheet DD-12 shows 1 1/2" clr typ for both outside and inside.




Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #11: Under which bid item will the structure excavation and structure backfill for the Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert be paid under.
Inquiry submitted 08/13/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/13/2013


Response #2:Payed per item 101 per Section 9-1.03 Payment Scope of the Standard Specification.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #12: 1-Ref Plan Sheets 84-85, and the bid items and Special Provisions.-
Please confirm that, because of the nature of the work, the nom. 15'-0" Transitions between Type 60 and Type 736 or 732 Barriers, will be measured and paid as Items 187(F) and 188(F).

2-There is a conflict in the description quantification and details shown on plan sheets L-3 L-4,Q-3 and Detail for Modify Existing DTBB on C-14. Your work descriptions, at Run # 22, on the layout an quantification sheets call for MBGR removal and New STBB. The details on C-14, indicate a partial removal of existing DBBL Thrie Beam Barrier with installation of new MBGR. Will this be clarified via addendum to all plan holders before bid date?

Inquiry submitted 08/13/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/13/2013


Response #2:1-Payment for Transition is included in Type 60 rail. Please bid per the current contract documents.

2-No, modified existing thrie beam detail on C-14 is paid for under remove MBGR item 35.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #13: Ref Special provisison section9, pg. 25- Please confirm that guard railing thrie beam and terminal systems will be eligible as Item 16, of added section 9-1-1.16C indicates.
Inquiry submitted 08/13/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/14/2013


Response #2:Yes.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #14: What is the joint sealant to be used for item #88 "seal pavement joint"? Only the isolation joint material is provided.
Inquiry submitted 08/14/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/14/2013


Response #2:Section 40-1.02l(2) “Silicone Joint Sealant,” of the Standard Specifications/Special Provisions states, “Silicone joint sealant must be on the Authorized Materials List.” This website is located at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/approved_products_list/
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #15: There is no bid item for local borrow. Please confirm that the excavation of stockpile gets paid in Bid Item 57 Roadway Excavation.
Inquiry submitted 08/14/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/15/2013


Response #2:YES, please refer to Addendum No 2.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #16: When will the contractor have access to install the 84" Water Line as shown on Contract Drawing D-6 Sheet 151?
Inquiry submitted 08/15/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/15/2013


Response #2:Access to install a portion of the 84” Modified RCP on parcel 34804, will not be available until August 2014, See Addendum 2
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #17: Layout Drawing L-6 Sheet 41 shows temporary construction easement Lots 1, 2, and 3. Will the contractor have exclusive use of the easements, or will the contractor need to keep access for the property owners?
Inquiry submitted 08/15/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/15/2013


Response #2:Yes contractor has exclusive use, but contractor to maintain and provide walkway for existing emergency exit at Lot 1 per plan sheet 288, see Addendum 2.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #18: Please indicate where the 3" Gas line and the underground electrical line on Contract Drawing U-3 sheet 300 that serves parcel 646-131-14 is being relocated.
Inquiry submitted 08/15/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/15/2013


Response #2:Utilities outlined in Inquiry #18 will be relocated outside of Caltrans Right of Way and out of Caltrans Temporary Construction Easements.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #19: Can utility relocation work be constructed before parcel acquisition dates?
Inquiry submitted 08/15/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/15/2013


Response #2:No contract work can occur on private parcels until the parcel acquisition is provided. The existing gas and electrical lines south of the "A" line on plan sheet (U-3) will be relocated by others prior to the parcel availability date. The contractor is responsible to schedule the relocation of the existing waterline north of the "A" line on plan sheet 300 (U-3) per the work windows provided in Section 5-1.36D of the Special Provisions, after the parcel availability date.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #20: Please confirm that Bid Item 41 Removing Drainage Facilities is for the removal of Drainage Inlets and Headwalls.
Inquiry submitted 08/15/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/15/2013


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum 2, Item was removed.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #21: Bid Item 67: 4" supply line (bridge): it is not clear what type of pipe is required. please advise type of pipe and also requirements of the seismic expansion fitting.

Inquiry submitted 08/15/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/16/2013


Response #2:Please bid per current contract documents. Please refer to plan sheet 524 of the contract plan and to section 20-4.03, Supply Line on Structures, 4 Inches and Larger, especially sub-sections 20-4.03B(2) and 20-4.03B(7) of the Standard Specifications for pipe and seismic expansion requirements.
Response posted 08/21/2013




Inquiry #22: The geotechnical design report dated May 13, 2013 states under 9.0 Materials Sources “Materials present at Location 1, Location 2 and Location 3 were not evaluated during this investigation. Based on discussions with Caltrans Construction personnel, the materials at Location 2 and Location 3 are mostly comprised of non-cohesive soils, such as silts and sands, with lesser amounts of gravel and
cobbles. These non-cohesive materials are deemed suitable for use in embankment fill, as Class V Aggregate Base material and in areas where low expansion fill is required.” Please confirm that the material in stockpile location 2 and 3 on figure 4 of the geotechnical report will be suitable for use as Class V ASB for this project. If the answer is “no” or “bid per plans and specifications”, then Caltrans needs to provide test results for these stockpiles in order for Contractors to accurately bid the project. According to the report, the Contractor who built the previous 905 project is the only Contractor to have knowledge regarding the soil properties in these stockpiles.

Inquiry submitted 08/16/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/16/2013


Response #2:Section 9.0 of the same Geotechnical Report states “Location 2 and 3 contain random lifts of expansive cohesive material that may only be used for embankment fill. Selective excavation will therefore be required in these stockpiles depending on the intended use of the borrow material.” Section 11.0, item 10 states “Non-cohesive materials present at the location 2 and location 3 stockpiles may be used for embankment fill and for Class V low expansion potential materials beneath pavements and on slopes. Selective excavation will be required in these stockpiles to minimize the inclusion of clayey soils in materials intended for use as low expansive and Class V applications.”
Response posted 08/26/2013


Response #3:Please refer to the information provided at the link below:
2013-08-30 SR-11 Exploratory Data Memorandum 001.pdf
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #23: Will Caltrans have locations in the ROW of this project to stockpile excess soils that are generated at the end of the project?
Inquiry submitted 08/16/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/16/2013


Response #2:No excess soil stockpile sites have been identified within Caltrans right of way.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #24: FYI
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2013

Response #1:An addendum will be issued to delay the bid opening by a minimum of one week.
Response posted 08/19/2013


Response #2:Please see Addendum No 1.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #25: Note 1 on Plan Sheet No. 81 states remove highly expansive soils and replace with class V agg base. The chart on sheet 81 specifically identifies the highly expansive soil locations. Note 2 states that any areas where highly expansive soils are NOT known to be present, remove the top 24" and recompact the next 12". In the areas on non-high expansive material (the areas not listed on the chart on sheet 81), is Class V Agg Base still required?

The notes state that it is needed for the highly expansive soils, but the case drawings show class V base in all cases.

Inquiry submitted 08/19/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/19/2013


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum No 2.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #26: For Item Nos. 163 - Chain Link Fence (Type CL-6, Vinyl-Clad), do we need to paint/powder coat the posts too? Didn't see anything even on the Caltrans 2010 Standard Specifications, please clarify. Thanks
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/19/2013


Response #2:Standard Fence posts are being used. Fence posts material per Standard Specifications see Chain Link Fences Section 80-3.02 Materials.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #27: The 13.0" Wall for the 'Modified' 84" RCP is not available. Can you please provide the design criteria used for the 'Modified' 84" RCP (Detail Found on DD-12)? As we need to engineer/design for an available wall greater than 13.0".
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/20/2013


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #28: The Caltrans Class 5 Aggregate Grading table on page 59 of the Special Provisions shows 100 percent passing on the No. 4, 16-40 percent passing on the No. 30 and 4-10 percent passing on the No. 200. Given this gradation as outlined the material has now become a specialized manufactured product either coming from a commercial source or from extensive onsite processing to remove course aggregates and/or excessive fines. Both processes whether its onsite or offsite manufacturing will require an enormous amount of time and money to produce. Are there other alternative materials that can be used or is it possible that the gradation for the Class 5 be changed?
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/20/2013


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum No 2.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #29: Are the aggregates used in the manufacture of Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) required to comply with the requirements under the Special Provisions Section 39-1.18C(1)?
Inquiry submitted 08/20/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/20/2013


Response #2:Please clarify, Section 39 relates to HMA not Reinforced Concrete Pipe.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #30: Please indicate what plan sheets illustrate the details and specific requirements for the following bid items.
Bid Item 68 10” Corrugated High Density Polyethylene Pipe Conduit(Quantity: 690 LF)
Bid Item 69 Extend 10” Conduit (Quantity: 12 LF)

Inquiry submitted 08/20/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/20/2013


Response #2:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/20/2013


Response #3:See Construction Details Sheet C-14.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #31: As for item #19 TEMPORARY HYDRAULIC MULCH (BONDED FIBER MATRIX) on sheet number 118/WPCQ-1. It looks like we are putting down two applications of the BFM on the areas. Should we bid this as a full application rate of BFM per the 2010 standard spec or is there a specific rate.
Inquiry submitted 08/21/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/21/2013


Response #2:Use full application rate given in 2010 Standard Provisions (3,500 lb/acre). Two applications anticipated, one for each rainy season.
Response posted 08/26/2013




Inquiry #32: Sheet 549/622 measures approx 6000 SF of Rock Cobble Slope Paving while the plan qty is only 1313 SF. This would increase bid item #143 by about 5000 SF except it is a final pay item. Will you consider adjusting the quantity for bid item #143?
Inquiry submitted 08/21/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/21/2013


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #33: Bid item # 133 84" Modified "13"" thick RCP & Bid Item # 101F Structural Concrete box Culvert is designed with a 24" thick top & bottom & 20" thick side walls. This was incorporated in the design due to the high chloride & sulfate concentrations per sec 7-2.3 of the Geotechnical Design Report dated May 13, 2013. Rialto Concrete Products has manufactured standard wall sizes with a low w/c ratio and addative SIKA 1+ (http://usa.sika.com/en/solutions_products/download/doc_download/iframe_and_dropdown/sika-1plus-pds.html)which is used to manufacture watertight concrete products. If this is an allowed option will Bid item # 101 be allowed as a precast alternative per Caltrans Standard D83A & D83B.
Inquiry submitted 08/23/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/23/2013


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #34: Please clarify what is meant by "foundation treatment" for the Class 4 Aggregate Subbase. (Ref. DWG X-1)Is there any difference between the Class 4 SB and the Class 4 SB* (Foundation Treatment)? Is "foundation treatment" required over compacted Class 5 SB?
Inquiry submitted 08/26/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/26/2013


Response #2:No difference between Class 4 SB and Class 4SB* (Foundation Treatment). Yes, foundation treatment is required over Class 5 SB, see Addendum 2.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #35: Please reference inquiry #22.

As stated in your response: "Location 2 and 3 contain random lifts of expansive cohesive material that may only be used for embankment fill. Selective excavation will therefore be required in these stockpiles depending on the intended use of the borrow material...Selective excavation will be required in these stockpiles to minimize the inclusion of clayey soils in materials intended for use as low expansive and Class V applications".

We reiterate our request in the original inquiry: "Caltrans needs to provide test results for these stockpiles in order for Contractors to accurately bid the project. According to the report, the Contractor who built the previous 905 project is the only Contractor to have knowledge regarding the soil properties in these stockpiles".

Without information as to the properties of the existing materials, the amount of "selective excavation" required is impossible to predict.

Inquiry submitted 08/27/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/27/2013


Response #2:Please refer to the information provided at the link below:
2013-08-30 SR-11 Exploratory Data Memorandum 001.pdf
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #36: Reference Special Provisions Section 2-1.06C and 8-1.04C. Are the 30 days for Phase 2 release and the 70 days for job start to run concurrently?
Inquiry submitted 08/27/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/27/2013


Response #2:Yes, these days will run concurrently.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #37: Utility Plan Sheets U-3 and U-4 calls out water, gas to be relocated by others. When will they be relocated and how long would it take?


Inquiry submitted 08/28/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/28/2013


Response #2:See Section 5-1.36D of the Special Provisions and Addendum 2 for the waterline. The gas line will be located prior to a parcel possession.
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #38: Drainage Detail Sheet DD-37 calls out drain structures 5i, 5k, and 5m, which are precast 72” RCP with 36” RCP risers. Per the Drainage Quantities sheet DQ-6, does the 72” RCP, manhole frame & cover, & grate chain get paid under Bid Item 137 - 36” RCP Riser?


Inquiry submitted 08/28/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/28/2013


Response #2:No, as shown on sheet DQ-5 (5i,5k,5m) 72" pipe is paid under minor concrete(minor structure) and Frame ,cover & chain are paid under Misc Iron & steel.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #39: Per addendum 2, special provisions, section 19-2.03 states that “Stockpiles within 150 feet of Bridge abutments must b e excavated to the toe of stockpile, placed back per section 19-5.” Please provide the toe elevation of the stockpiles.
Inquiry submitted 08/29/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/29/2013


Response #2:The toe elevations of the stockpiles are shown on the updated cross sections.
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #40: Per addendum 2, special provisions, section 19-2.03 states that “Stockpiles within 150 feet of Bridge abutments must b e excavated to the toe of stockpile, placed back per section 19-5.” How will this work be measured for payment? Will the measurement be taken from a vertical plane 150’ from the abutment or will there be an allowance to safely slope the cut back?
Inquiry submitted 08/29/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/29/2013




Inquiry #41: Per addendum 2, special provisions, section 19-2.03 states that “Stockpiles within 150 feet of Bridge abutments must b e excavated to the toe of stockpile, placed back per section 19-5.” How will this work be measured for payment? Will the measurement be taken from a vertical plane 150’ from the abutment or will there be an allowance to safely slope the cut back?
Inquiry submitted 08/29/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/29/2013


Response #2:Measurement will be taken from the allowable cut slope of the material.
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #42: Can we get a clarification on the diameter of the compost sock. There is no clear definition of it shown.
Inquiry submitted 08/29/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/30/2013


Response #2:Please refer to Specification Section 21-1.02Q.
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #43: Section 5-1.36D of the Special Provisions states that “No construction is permitted within 75 feet of either side of the existing Calpeak overhead electrical alignment located between Station 25+00 and 28+00 (“A” Line) before February, 1 2014 until Calpeak Electric relocates their overhead facility.” Is the contractor to not construct work with 75’ of the stations 25+00 to 28+00, or are they to no construct work within 75’ of the actual facility. Either way, this will restrict the contractor’s ability to construct the Stage 1 and Milestone 1 work of constructing the temporary drainage culvert, RCB, and Embankments along the “A” Line.
Inquiry submitted 08/30/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/30/2013


Response #2:No construction work within 75-ft of actual facility. The no construction work zone falls within the station limits 25+00 to 28+00 “A” Line.
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #44: In the response to bidder’s inquiry 23 Caltrans stated that they have not identified any excess soil stockpile locations. Due to the staging requirements of the project, it may be necessary to dispose of excess material generated form Stage 3 excavations. Will the contractor be allowed to place material in existing stockpiles 1 & 2 shown in C-8?
Inquiry submitted 08/30/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/30/2013


Response #2:No
Response posted 08/30/2013




Inquiry #45: On Item 163- Chain Link Fence (Type CL-6, Vinyl Clad)...a recent site visit revealed that on previous stages of construction...a vinyl coated 1" mesh chain link fabric was used with galvanized posts.Caltrans has already verified the use of standard fence posts but there is nothing in the plans or special provisions that indicates the use of a 1" mesh, can you please clarify the type of chain link fence fabric to be used? Thank you.

Inquiry submitted 09/03/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 09/03/2013


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/03/2013




Inquiry #46: We have received notice from ebidboard.com this project has been cancelled. Please confirm if the project has been cancelled.
Inquiry submitted 09/03/2013

Response #1:No, the project has not been cancelled. Bids for 11-056324 will be opened on 09-05-13. The notice from ebidboard.com was sent out in error. Any complaints/questions should be directed to ebidboard.com. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused.
Response posted 09/03/2013




Inquiry #47: The isolation casing is called out on Sheet 569 as 3/16" thick. This thickness can only be provided as multi-plate, not CMP. Will 8 ga. CMP suffice? The thickness of 8 ga. is 0.168" as opposed to 0.1875" currently required.
Inquiry submitted 09/04/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 09/04/2013


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/05/2013






The information provided in the responses to bidder inquiries is not a waiver of Section 2-1.03, “Examination of Plans, Specifications, Contract, and Site of Work,” of the Standard Specifications or any other provision of the contract, nor to excuse the contractor from full compliance with the contract. Bidders are cautioned that subsequent responses or contract addenda may change a previous response.