Viewing inquiries for 11-406704

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: The sign-in sheet from the Pre-Bid meeting can be found at the link below.
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:11-406704 Pre-Bid Meeting Sign-in Sheet
Response posted 01/29/2014




Inquiry #2: Special Provision section 8-1.09 indicates, “…the department may accelerate its inspection and testing. The Department deducts any additional expensed incurred as a result of the acceleration.” Please clearly define the scope of the acceleration charges.

Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #3: Please reference pavement sections 1 and 6 as shown on Sheet 2 of 259. Can the base be replaced with the paving material above and poured as a monolith?
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:No. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/04/2014




Inquiry #4: Please add the Armor Guard Barrier System to section 9-1.16C.
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:No. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/04/2014




Inquiry #5: Our estimate is substantially higher than the EE. Please advise if there are sufficient funds for this project.
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3 for the revised scope of work.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #6: Our estimate is substantially higher than the EE. Please advise if there are sufficient funds for this project.
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:This question is identical to inquiry #5. Please see response to inquiry #5
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3 for the revised scope of work.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #7: On page 42 of 105 of the project specifications, the Section 39-1.02 F(1) specifies a Test Temperature of 140± 2 degrees F for the AASHTO T324 (Modified) Hamburg Wheel Test. However, the RSS dated 11-15-2013 specifies a Test Temperature of 131± 2 degrees F for PG64 binder. Will Caltrans issue an addendum to revise the specification in Contract# 11-406704 to a Test Temperature of 131 ± 2 degrees F for the Hamburg Wheel Test?
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents which include REVISED STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS DATED 04-19-13
Response posted 02/04/2014


Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #8: On page 42 of 105 of the project specifications, Section 39-1.02 F(3) specifies RAP fractionation on ¼’ screen. However, the RSS dated 11-15-2013 specifies RAP fractionation on 3/8” screen. Will Caltrans issue an addendum to revise the specification in Contract# 11-406704 to fractionate the RAP on 3/8” screen?
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents which include REVISED STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS DATED 04-19-13
Response posted 02/04/2014


Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #9: On page 42 of 105 of the project specifications, Section 39-1.01 F(3) specifies to fractionate RAP into coarse fraction RAP and fine fraction RAP. The current Section 39 draft specifications contain the following language: “You may use the coarse fractionated stockpile, the fine fractionated stockpile, or a combination of the coarse and fine fractionated stockpiles”. We understand that for more information or clarification on this language, Joe Peterson with Caltrans can be contacted. Will the contractor have the option to use coarse fraction or fine fraction or both?
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 01/30/2014


Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #10: On page 44 of 105 of the project specifications, the table for “Additional HMA Mix Design Requirements for RAP substitution rate greater than 15 percent” specifies the minimum dry strength of 120 psi for HMA Type A. Based on the recent industry communications with Caltrans (Joe Peterson, Chief, Office of Roadway Materials Testing METS) on Section 39 Superpave specifications, it is our understanding that the minimum dry strength has been reduced to 100 psi for HMA Type A. Will Caltrans issue an addendum to revise the specification in Contract#11-406704 to a minimum dry strength of 100 psi?
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the currrent contract documents.
Response posted 01/30/2014




Inquiry #11: In section 40-1.02E and 40-1.02F of the Special Provisions it states that the tie bars and dowels bars must be stainless-steel. Stainless steel bars must be descaled, pickled, polished, and solid stainless-steel bars under ASTM A 955/A 955M, Grade 60, UNS Designation S31603 or S31803. Please specify the requirements for the wire for dowel bar and tie bar baskets.
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents which include REVISED STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS DATED 04-19-13.

Attention is directed to section 40-1.02G.


Response posted 02/12/2014


Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #12: In section 68-801A of the Special Provisions it states that the synthetic subsurface drainage layer (SSDL) for concrete pavement uses a RoaDrain product, manufactured by SynTec, a GSE Environmental company, and distributed by Tensar International Corporation. The SSDL uses a product designated by specific trade name to obtain a necessary item that is only available from one source and to determine the product's suitability for future use. In regards to this product, please specify the amount of overlap required and a detailed method of securing the rolls together. Also, please indicate if the SSDL is required to be secured to the LCB and RSCB layers and at what frequency and method
Inquiry submitted 01/29/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/29/2014


Response #2:Please refer to the Special Provisions, section 68-8, "Synthetic Subsurface Drainage Layer," which includes 68-8.01B, "Submittals," and 68-8.03, "Construction".
Response posted 01/30/2014




Inquiry #13: Pavement Section 6 requires .95' JPCPRS and .35' of RSCB. Special Provisions 28-3.03C directs construction of tranverse joints at 30 foot intervals. As the final layer of JPCPRS will have joints at the required 12', 15', 13' and 14' intervals, isn't the owner concerned with reflective cracking?
Inquiry submitted 01/30/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/30/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 03/12/2014




Inquiry #14: Special Provision Section 28-3 Rapid Strength Concrete Base is requiring a minimum of 600 Psi modulus of rupture at 7 days and cleanness values that are not normally associated with 28-2.02 Materials. Should the RSCB refer to section 90-1.02C Aggregates?
Inquiry submitted 01/30/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/30/2014


Response #2:RSCB does refer to section 90-1.02C Aggregates.

Please refer to section 28-3.02B, "Rapid Strength Concrete Base."

"Concrete for RSCB must be RSC."

Please refer to section 1.01, "General," of the Standard Specifications.

"Division X includes specifications for common materials. For a material specified in this division, that material specified in any section must comply with the specifications in division X."

Response posted 02/05/2014




Inquiry #15: Item 28 Remove Concrete Pavement and Base per the Summary of Quantity sheets Q-7 through Q-15 is for removals for the new JPCP. Where is the removals for the new Individual Slab Replacement and Precast Prestresed Concrete paid?
Inquiry submitted 01/31/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/31/2014


Response #2:Refer to Specification Section 41-9 for pavement removal payment associated with the individual slab replacements. Refer to sheet Q-13 for the quantities for pavement removal associated with precast prestressed concrete pavement. Bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/05/2014




Inquiry #16: The SSL layer discourages holes, yet to attach the dowel baskets to the lean concrete (RSC) in areas of Structural Sections 1 and section 6 nails will have to be shot through the SSL layer in numerous areas. Does the owner expect this to be patched prior to subsequent layer of paving?
Inquiry submitted 02/04/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/04/2014


Response #2:Please refer to the Special Provisions, section 68-8, "Synthetic Subsurface Drainage Layer," which includes 68-8.01B, "Submittals," 68-8.02, "Materials,"and 68-8.03, "Construction".
Response posted 02/05/2014




Inquiry #17: Ref. Plan Sheets X-1 thru X-6. Note #3 on X-1 appears to call for .." * =1.0' Depth of Imported Borrow".. This seems inappropriate for the conditions shown with * on all the X Section sheets. Your details indicate shoulder backing to the top of new dike, which is much less than " 1.0' ". Clarify Note #3 on X-1, please.
Inquiry submitted 02/04/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/04/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/05/2014




Inquiry #18: Reference Bid Item 12 Armorguard Barrier System which has a quantity of 1,120 lf. In addition, reference Contract Special Provision section 12-3.18C, the last paragraph indicates that the contractor must have four complete systems on the job at all times. One system is eight 28 foot sections or 224 feet plus the transition section/Absorb 350 crash cushions = approximately 260 lineal feet per system. Four systems is 1040 feet. How did the Engineer arrive at the bid quantity of 1,120 feet? How is this bid item measured and paid?
Inquiry submitted 02/05/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/05/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #19: Reference Section 12-3.18 Armorguard Barrier System of the Contract Special Provisions. This section identifies the material, the source, the cost and refers to the manufacturer’s installation instructions. The manufacturer’s installation instructions are for assembly. The plans or specifications do not indicate when to use the system, where it is to be located within the work area or how many systems to use per location. At the pre-bid meeting it was stated that this project is a pilot program for the use of the Armorguard Barrier System and that it is not the intent to hinder the contractor’s operations with the use of the barrier system. Is the system required for use in all aspects of the Project that require a lane closure? Please provide the specific operations or bid items where CALTRANS envisions use of the barrier system. In addition, please provide specific details where the barrier should be placed in relation to lane closures and the work area. Without this detailed information, the Contractor is unable to determine how it will affect the various operations and the amount of labor required to deploy and remove the Armorguard Barrier System.
Inquiry submitted 02/05/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/05/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #20: Is the reseal of existing joints to be completed using Type R joint detail with a 1/2" minimum width?

Will this item include the sealing around the Individual Slab Replacments?

Inquiry submitted 02/05/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/05/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014


Response #3:Q1. Is the reseal of existing joints to be completed using Type R joint detail with a 1/2" minimum width?
A1. Attention is directed to Section 40-1.02I(1) of the special provisions.

Q2. Will this item include the sealing around the Individual Slab Replacments?
A2. Attention is directed to Section 41-9.03G, “Joints” of the Standard Specifications.
Response posted 03/27/2014




Inquiry #21: There is no method of paying for demo related to precast pavement. The states answer to inquiry #15 is confusing and not addressing the issue.

ISR-RSC includes demo of concrete and base
LCB-RS does not include demo
JPCP-RSC does not include demo
RSCB does not include demo
PPCP does not include demo of the existing only the chipping of the slots for dowels
Please increase item #29 to be the sum of item #40 RSCB, item #41 LCB-RS(minus that under ISR-RSC), item #55 JPCP-RSC, item #58 PPCP.
14000+385+38700+990 = 54075


Inquiry submitted 02/05/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/05/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #22: Please explain the logic for the LCBRS strength specs...450psi comp. to work on it, but yet a lower 200psi comp. at opening to live traffic.
Shouldn't these two numbers be reversed...200psi to work on it, and 450psi traffic/opening and 725psi@7day.


Inquiry submitted 02/05/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/05/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/12/2014




Inquiry #23: Are safety edge treatments required for JPCP-RSC? Will the quantity of JPCP in CY be measured and paid for?

Safety edge treatments required for PPCP? - Measured and paid for?

Safety edge treatments required for ISR-RSC? - Measured and paid for?

Inquiry submitted 02/05/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/05/2014


Response #2:The current project plans do not require the construction of a safety edge. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 02/07/2014




Inquiry #24: What are the allowable work hours for grinding the SB truck scale areas?
Inquiry submitted 02/06/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/06/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Section 12-4.05E Chart no.E5.
Response posted 02/07/2014


Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #25: The Special Provisioins do not seem to allow a deviation of Section 51-5.03E of the Standards which requires 12 hours of elapsed time between the placement of the Paving Notch Extension to the placement of the Approach Slab. Prior to the 2010 Standards, project specials required 1 hour of elapsed time. Is the current Standards the intent for this project?
Inquiry submitted 02/11/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/11/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3.
Response posted 03/21/2014




Inquiry #26: Item # 60 - code: 410103 Drill hole (Jacking)
Item #61 - code: 410107 Grout (Jacking)

Request to substitute Mud jacking(pavement jacking) process for a lighter, equally as strong material, Eretek polyurethane polymer resin(foam).

Our 486 product specifically for road ways and railroads is cleaner, fast acting, and more hydro insensitive than standard grout.
Our product weighs less than 5% of the weight of standard cement/concrete based grouts, and is very expansive.
We can guarantee our products for 10 years and our cost is usually significantly lower than the cost of pavement jacking.
We are currently completing roadway projects for the ADOT and have pictures and experience to back that our product work.
For more information, feel free to call us. We can set us a lunch and learn whenever possible to discuss our product.

Request: to substitute pavement jacking for 486 polymer

Inquiry submitted 02/12/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/12/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents. Consider using the "Opt-In" feature on the Bidder's Inquiry site to make yourself available as a sub contractor.
Response posted 02/14/2014




Inquiry #27: Section 39-1.31 is a warm mix technology option using a superpave mix design for the HMA and RHMA. Will it also be an option to use a superpave design without warm mix tecnology?
Inquiry submitted 03/19/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration
Response posted 03/19/2014


Response #2:Please refer to Section 39 of the REVISED STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS DATED 04-19-13. Bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 03/20/2014




Inquiry #28: Contours are not provided. To adequately estimate cut/fill, please provide original and final contours.
Inquiry submitted 03/24/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 03/24/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 03/27/2014




Inquiry #29: On plan page ECL-1 - seed mix - The seed suppliers are stating that the rate for the Baccharis Pilularis is too high. Their suggestions are at .1 -.3 lbs/ac instead of the 3 lbs/ac.Can you clarify the correct rate to use?
Inquiry submitted 04/02/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/02/2014


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents. Any rate change will be done by change order with the successful bidder.
Response posted 04/03/2014




Inquiry #30: In response to Inquiry #20 Q1, please clarify the following:

All NEW contraction joints are to be Type B?

All longitudinal existing joints are to be Type R?

Inquiry submitted 04/03/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/04/2014


Response #2:All NEW contraction joints are to be Type B?
Yes. But, note that the only transverse joints to be sealed are on the "TSS" line. Refer to Q-15.

All longitudinal existing joints are to be Type R?
Yes, except those shown on Q-15 shown as isolation joints.

Response posted 04/07/2014






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.