Inquiries for Project 04-006034

CONTRACTOR'S INQUIRY RESPONSES

September 25, 2001

CONTRACT NO. 04-006034
New Benicia Bridge

***********For all parties that have requested the groundwater samples, the samples will be available for pickup on Wednesday July 11, 2001 at 10:00am. Please meet Charles Smith, of Caltrans, at the front gate to Rhodia , Inc, located at 100 Mococo Road , Martinez, CA.**************

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 Tollbridge Duty Senior at Duty_Senior_Tollbridge_District04@dot.ca.gov. The mailing address is P.O. Box 23660, Oakland, CA 94623-0660. The Duty Senior's telephone number is (510) 286-5549 and the fax number is (510) 286-4563. All inquiries must include the contract number.

1. Please let me know who I need to contact to order a set of bid documents for the referenced project.

For the official paper versions of the bidders and non-bidder packages, write to the California Department of Transportation, Plans and Bid Documents, Room 0200, P.O. Box 942874, Sacramento, CA 94272-0001, telephone (916) 654-4490 or fax (916) 654-7028. Office hours are 7:30 a.m. to 4:15p.m. When ordering bidder or non-bidder packages it is important that you include a telephone and fax number, P.O. Box and street address so that you can receive addenda.

2. We just received our documents for the above referenced project, the new Benicia Bridge. Our copy of your CD of the Materials Handout is unreadable. Please send another.

The Materials Handouts are now posted. See the link below:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/index.html?Ben-Mar/006034/MaterialsHandout/MaterialsList.html

3. The notice to contractors states that a prebid meeting will be held on May 18, two days after the bid date. Either move the prebid earlier or extend the bid date. Please clarify.

Please see Addendum #1

4. Sheet A-5, Detail A of the architectural plans gives a building footing depth of 749 mm. Sheet ST-4, Detail 1 of the architectural plans gives a building footing depth of 686 mm. Please advise on the correct footing depth.

Please see Addendum #4

5. Sheets U7 and U8 of the utility plans, shows the location of the existing water and gas lines. Please provide elevations for the above utility lines.

The water line and gas line were abandoned as part of an earlier contract. These lines will be removed as part of the Roadway Excavation on this contract.

6. Sheet U7 shows the abandoned wells. Please state the type of well, size of well and depth of well.

Please see Addendum #4

7. Sheet C3 of the civil plans shows the slag area. Elevations are needed to find the depth of the slag excavation.

Please see Addendum #4

8. Road Excavation, grading and pier excavation ? Please forward the cross sections showing original ground elevations.

Cross Sections for this project are available for purchase at Blue Print Services, Oakland, CA., Tel. No. 510-287-5485. They are also available for viewing by appointment with the Duty Senior, Tel. No. 510-286-5549.

9. Modify Monitoring Wells ? Please forward existing elevations.

Please see Addendum #4

10. Sheet D-8 shows a concrete headwall. Please advise the bid item to which this work will be paid.

The Headwall is being paid for as Minor Concrete (Minor Structure) on sheet D-9.

11. Temporary Crash Cushion Modules are discussed in the Special Provisions on page 117. Please advise the correct bid item for this work.

Please see Addendum #4

12. Sheet ST-4 shows a building section with the thickness of the concrete roof varying between 178 mm and 267 mm. Detail B on Sheet A-5 shows the roof to be 279 mm at its narrowest point. Please advise on the correct thickness of the roof.

Please see Addendum #4

13. Please advise the correct date of the pre-bid meeting for this project. See Page 1 of the notice to Contractors for details.

Please see Addendum #1

14. The bid calls for an A + B bid proposal, but no information is provided for Part B. Please clarify.

"B" refers to the number of working days bid for completion of the work as stated in the Special Provisions.

15. The questionnaire, found in the bid proposal, implies that we are to submit responses, which include all proposed subcontractors and suppliers. At the time of the bid, information dealing with subcontractors and suppliers will be hard to provide. Can this information provided only for the General Contractor?

No. Please refer to Addendum #1 for revisions made to the questionnaire.

16. We would like to know about Stockpile Dewatering (NPDES)-Permit-CAS000002 & CAS 000003 as mentioned in the Specs (pg.99). Can you clarify?

Please refer to Material Handouts, Reports and Correspondence at the Caltrans web site: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/index.html?Ben-Mar/006034/MaterialsHandout/MaterialsList.html . The NPDES Permits CAS000002 and CAS000003 are referred to General NPDES and NPDES Permit for Caltrans.

17. The Informational handout that came with the bid packet for the Benicia Martinez Bridge contract# 04-006034 mentions several times the Environmental Imapct Report. What is this report and where can we find a copy of it? Our estimators would like to view it and use it to refer to.

The Environmental Impact Statement / Environmental Impact Report are available for purchase at Blue Print Services, Oakland, CA., Tel. No. 510-287-5485. They are also available for viewing by appointment with the Duty Senior, Tel. No. 510-286-5549.

18. We would like to know where can we get the BIDDERS LIST?

The list of plan holders for this or any other project is available on the Internet. Go to http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/index.html. Then Go to: Advertised Projects. Then Go to: List of Plan Holders on Projects Out to Bid. This contract number is 04-006034.

19. Please forward the following permits for the Benicia-Martinez project, contract #04-006034, as listed under section 5-1.26 of the special provisions:

* USCG Bridge permit-New Benicia bridge

* BCDC permit No. 17-99(M)

* National Marine Fisheries Service

* RWCQB File No. 2128.03

* U.S. Army Corps of Engineer-File No.....

* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-file No.1-1-96-F-40

Please refer to Material Handouts, Reports, and Correspondence at the Caltrans website ; http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/project_ads_addenda/04/04-006034/

20. We would like to review/obtain:

* Geological Data

* Railroad Bridge Layout Drawings

* Existing Oil Pipe Lines

* Haz Material Report

The foundation report was part of the Material Handout CD. The other information requested is still pending.
Please see Addendum #4

21. Are full size plans available? If so, where can we get them? Do we have to purchase the whole set or can we buy individual sheets?

No, full size plans are not available.

22. Sheet 65 of the summary of quantities for the pavement delineation plan, shows retro-reflectors are required. Sheet A20D of the standard plans for detail 38A indicates there are no retro-reflectors for this type of pavement marking. Please clarify whether the retro-reflectors are to be included or not.

Please see Addendum #4

23. Sheets 30 ? 32 of 557 show Temporary Drainage Inlet Protection details. Please advise the type of inlet to be used at the specified locations.

The different alternatives of the "Temporary Drainage Inlet Protection Details" are included as part of the contract plans and apply to different field conditions. Selection of specific type of temporary inlet protection will be done in accordance with Section 10-1.05, "Temporary Drainage Inlet Protection" of the Special Provisions.

24. Mococo Road, on sheet no. 13 it shows the stations 10+00.00 to 12+16.869, on sheet no. 35 Stations 12+00 to 10+70.583, on summary sheets no. 63 & 64 it shows stations 11+11.00 to 11+78.00. Please provide correct stations. There is no typical cross sections please provide. What is the thickness of new asphalt concrete? Where is the 15 m3 of class 3 aggregate base?

Please see Addendum #4

25. Construction Access Road (L-line), on sheet no. 2 the stations are 10+00 to 12+20, on sheet no. 66 it states 10+00 to 14+24, please provide the correct stations. Sheets 14 & 15 show 10+00 to 14+24, which is correct?

Please see Addendum #4

26. Bid Item # 50, Erosion Control (Blanket) is applied in two specified areas as shown on plans. Special Provisions, page 136, explains that the Erosion Control (Blanket) is also applied to Unlined Ditches and Swales. There are no quantities shown under Erosion or Drainage.

A.) Is there a separate bid item for the Erosion Control (Blanket) on unlined ditches and swales?

B.) Where on the plans for the unlined ditch Type 1 [sheet # 43 of 557], does it show an Erosion Control (Blanket)?

Please see Addendum #4

27. Sheet Q-4 states roadway excavation is 18,670 cubic meters, the bid sheet states that roadway excavation is 13,200 cubic meters. Which quantity is correct?

Please see Addendum #4

28. What is the spacing of the rebar (drawing number 419&420/557, section D-D)square in shape (#16) and the L shaped bar (#16) that goes out of the curb into the barrier wall? Also the # 16 rebar that is U shaped has no spacing as well? What would be the spacing on these different shapes of rebar in the overhead sign locations?

Please see Addendum #4

29. Sheet C-3 shows cinder soil at the top of the page. This appears to be outside of the roadway. Does this material get included in the contaminated excavation quantity? Please advise.

No.

30. Sheet Q-4 shows a summary of roadway quantities, with embankment totaling 9857 cubic meters. Does this material get paid under bid item # 35 ? roadway excavation? Please advise.

Please see Addendum #4

31. Page 172, paragraph two of the special provisions, states that the unit price for the CIDH piles is to include furnishing and placing concrete and reinforcement. Please clarify that the cost of the reinforcement for the 600-mm and larger CIDH piling is paid in bid items 97-98.

Paragraph 2 is an amendment to the Standard Specifications. Paragraph 5 of the same page, which is a special provision and thus governs, addresses payment for CIDH piles larger than 600mm. Payment for reinforcing in the CIDH's greater than 600mm is included in items 97, "Bar Reinforcing Steel (Bridge)" and/or ,98, "Bar Reinforcing Steel (Epoxy Coated) (Bridge)."

32. Does the reinforcement for the pre-cast pier footing form get paid for in Bid Item 78?

Yes, as outlined in the "Measurement and Payment" section on pages 211 and 212. Note the "Measurement and Payment" section is out of place in the document and should be placed after Section "Precast Pier Footing Forms" and before 10-1.46, "Architectural Surface (Textured Concrete)".

33. Page 172 of the special provisions discusses a load test pile bid item. There is no such bid item on the bid form. Is this work to be part of another bid item?

Please see Addendum #4

34. Where does the isolation casing associated with the 2.6-meter CIDH pile get paid?

3660 MM Corrugated Steel Pipe.

35. I need some clarification on Item Code 020650 "REACT 350.9, Crash Cushion. Is this system for "Uni or Bi Directional" Application?

Item code 020650 "REACT 350.9, crash cushion". This system is for "Uni Directional" application.

36. If we were to follow the dimensions shown on sheet 155 of 557 with ring form height of 1.375m and thickness on piers 6 through 17, the total quantity of the ring form is already close to what's shown on the bid item list without including other steels. If typical weight of steel (490 lb./ft^3) is used to find the quantity it is close to AASHTO M270, GR 50 that was listed on the plans. Meaning that our quantities for this item are different than item 101 on the bid item list. Please clarify.

Full compensation for the steel ring forms is included as a part of the precast pier footing form concrete, pay item No 78. See "Measurement and Payment" beginning on page 211 of the special provisions.

37. Per section 10-1.28 "DREDGING" in the special provisions of the above referenced project, the maximum amount of actual dredged material shall not exceed 16,000 cubic meters. Per our takeoff quantities, the amount of material and rock removed from the CIDH Piles alone drastically exceeds this value (i.e. 24,000 cubic meters). Our amount does not yet include any other type of excavation, so the required amount will greatly surpass our quantity of 24,000. Please check you quantiies and advise accordingly.

Please see Addendum #4

38. The summary of quantities, on sheet Q-4, shows asphalt concrete totaling 1232 tonnes, on Mococo Road. Please clarify that asphalt work is to be completed on Mococo Road. This quantity coupled with other asphalt requirements will result in approximately 2200 tonnes versus a bid quantity of 1378 tonnes (bid item # 61).

Please see Addendum #4

39. Please provide cross-sections for the RC Line in contract # 04-006034.

Cross Sections are available for purchase at Blue Print Services, Oakland, CA., Tel. No. 510-287-5485. They are also available for viewing by appointment with the Duty Senior, Tel. No. 510-286-5549.

40. Is it required to place topsoil at erosion control areas within this project? If yes, is this an import material and if so where will this item be paid?

No, It is not required.

41. Bid item #63 is for an asphalt concrete dike. Please clarify where this dike(s) is located.

Please see Addendum #4

42. Bid items #138 and 139 are for different types of railing. Please verify the bid quantities for these items, they look to be transposed. The tubular railing, bid item # 139 is detailed on sheet 424, with stationing given on sheets 131-134 (190 m). The chain link railing, bid item # 138 is detailed on sheet 408, with stationing given on sheet 134 (166 m).

Please see Addendum #4

43. Bid item #18 ? temporary drainage inlet protection are shown on the plans pages 30-32 of 557. Please advise the type of inlet protection to be used and the locations of the inlets to be protected.

44. Bid item # 106 is for roadside signs of one post. On sheet 67 on the plans it shows a total quantity of 11. The Bid item only shows a quantity of 1. Please advise the correct bid quantity for this item.

Please see Addendum #4

45. The bid form for contract # 04-006034 provides a line for a final bid price. Please verify this line is intended for only portion A of the A + B bid proposal form. Please also advise where to include information on the bid form for part B of the bid proposal.

Please see Addendum #4

46. Sheet U1 and U2 shows utilities to be removed, totaling 1300 meters. This quantity is not included in the current totals for utility removals. Are these 1300 meters included in this contract? If yes, please indicate where this bid item is to be paid? In addition, there are new water lines shown on the same plans. Are these to be included in this contract? If yes, please advise where this work will be paid.

Please see Addendum #4

47. We request a six week time extension to the bid date for the following reasons:

1. The project is extremely complex and the work is of a large magnitude, so
requires much joint venture time in meetings with partners as well as with
construction engineering consultants and with subcontractors. This is
requiring a significantly increased amount of estimating time.

2. Other projects in the area bidding are taking valuable estimating time and
conflicting with estimating time for the Benicia Martinez Bridge project.

3. The mandatory pre-bid meeting is scheduled after current bid date.

4. The complexity and magnitude of the project requires additional
estimating time for competitive pricing.

5. We strive to give Caltrans the best and most thorough bid prices possible
and postponing the bid date accordingly will make this possible.

Please see Addemdum #2

48. The specifications for Contract #04-006034 state under the A+B section: "All bids will be compared on the basis of the sum of the Engineer's Estimate of the Quantities of work to be done (total bid A), plus the product of the number of working days bid to complete all work (except phase II electrical), multiplied by the cost per day shown on the Engineer's estimate (Total Bid B)." However, the proposal does not include the value on the "cost per day". Please provide a "cost per day" and a separate form that totals the "A" portion plus the "B" portion.

Please see Addendum #4

49. Is there a requirement to "strut pier table #8" during the cantilever construction? Your construction sequence drawing (Sheet #430) is unclear as to your intentions. Please clarify.

Please see Addendum #4

50. Are splices permitted in the CIDH test pile?

Splices in reinforcing on the test pile are allowed as indicated on project plan sheet 176B, "Load Test Pile Details No. 1". The ultimate butt splice requirements do not apply to the load test pile bar reinforcing and ultimate butt splice submittals for the test pile bar reinforcing splices will not be reviewed if submitted, however, since the requirements do apply to many of the production pile splices and all of the hoop reinforcing in the production piles, it is recommended that the Contractor utilize this pre-production pile as an opportunity to verify that the bar reinforcing splices will meet the ultimate butt splice requirements of the specifications.

51. Assuming that the same method of drilling is performed, is it permitted to drill for the test pile with a drill rig other than the drill to be used for the production drilling? Note that the drill used for the production drilling may be a custom built drill that will take several months to manufacture. Delaying the test pile drilling until this drill is available could significantly delay foundation work startup.

No, see "Load Test Piles" of the special provisions. The Contractor's equipment is integral to the method and needs to be the same.

52. Please indicate where details of soil excavation backfill for the abutment are shown.

The pay limits for excavation and backfill at the abutment are as shown on the Caltrans Standard Plans, A62B and A62C, which are referenced on Project Plan Sheet 125, General Notes No. 1. Excavation will be either normal, hazardous or contaminated for payment purposes based on the depth below the original ground surface as shown the plans.

53. Please explain or indicate where the details of the joint between pier and piles are shown (piers 1, 2, 3 and 4). What does the thick line in the joint indicate?

The joint between the pile and the pier at Piers 2,3 and 4 is shown on Project Plan Sheet 177, Pile Details No 2. The heavy line at the joint in the various elevation views of these bents represents the thickness of the expansion joint material which is placed around the perimeter of the joint.

54. Our Joint Venture, is requesting a two week postponement on the bid date for the above project. Due to a previous commitment our Joint Venture partners and us will be participating in a complicated bid during the week this project is to bid. Consequently our partners and us will not have adequate time to prepare a competitive bid on the New Benicia Bridge, a project we feel we should be very competitive on. We would like the bid date postponed until May 30, 2001.

Please see Addendum #2

55. Page 42 of the Special Provisions lists a group of permits that have been obtained for the above stated project. Prior inquiry allowed us to obtain a portion of these permits including BCDC permit No. 17-99(M) and RWCQB File No. 2128.03. Please advise on how to obtain the remaining permit documents. A list is supplied below.

a. USCG Bridge permit - New Benicia Bridge

b. National Marine Fisheries Service

c. U.S. Army Corps of Engineer - File NO....

d. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - file No. 1-1-96-F-40

Please note that we have been supplied with an addendum to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service File No. 1-1-96-F-40, but the original permit was not included.

Please refer to Material Handouts, Reports, and Correspondence at the Caltrans website ; http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/project_ads_addenda/04/04-006034/

56. Access Trestle Foundation Recommendations dated August 17, 2000, given on the materials handout CD, discusses a set of Access Trestle Layout plans, numbered 1,2 and 3. Where and how can these documents be obtained?

The plans were never completed and are not available.

57. Sheet #127 shows Concrete Barrier Type 25 Modified. Does the type of concrete used in the barrier change according to the note on sheet #127, regarding the curb that the barrier sits on? In addition, is the rebar in this curb part of bid item #97?

No, the barrier concrete is per the standard specifications, it is not intended to be lightweight concrete like the edge beam is, that is why the barrier is shown with a dashed line type in the blowup diagram. Bar reinforcing within the barrier is paid as part of the barrier per the Standard Specifications.

58. Besides the headwalls -per answer to question #10 - what else is covered in Item #82?

Please see Addendum #4

59. The last sentence of section 10-1.01 Order of Work states that the test pile needs to be completed within 4 months of the award of this contract. Initial delivery time for the casing is at least 3 months. The process required by the specifications is lengthy and will easily cause the time to overrun the 4 months. What is the penalty for not completing this on time or can this period of time be extended?

There appears to be adequate time to procure the casing.

60. The fourth sentence from the last in Section 10-1.01 states that only one excavation can be open at a time between Abutment 1 and Pier 5. Why isn't the handling of groundwater left up to the contractor and thus not place a restraint on the contractor as this will lengthen the schedule for something that can be dealt with through construction practices?

Please see Addendum #6.

61. Why does the first pile after the load test pile need to be at Pier 9 and not at a pier location that needs to be constructed first in order to accommodate the segmental construction? Section 10-1.01 makes this statement in the thirteen sentence of the section.

Please bid the project as specified.

62. Page 170 of the specifications state that the contractor is to allow the engineer 15 to 20 days to perform acceptance testing of the piling. Does this apply to one pile or to whatever number of piles we turn over at any given time at each pier location?

The 15 to 20 days for acceptance testing is for any number of piles per pier that the Contractor turns over. However, if multiple piers are submitted simultaneously, then the Contractor shall prioritize the order for review by the State and the review times shall be
sequential and consecutive.

63. P.101 of the special provisions provides a table of the minimum concentrations of metals allowed in groundwater discharged at Pier 5. Please provide test data that you have of metal concentrations from samples taken around Pier 5. This data will provide all bidders with the information necessary to bid the amount of water treatment necessary.

64. Ref. Plan page 126: The "Limits of Payment for Exc and Backfill @ Piers 2-4" shows minor concrete between the pile and the isolation casing. Where is this minor concrete paid for?

See Section 10-1.67, "CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE" of the special provisions.

65. Ref. Item 12, plan page 159 & 184 and Specification secton 10-1.45 Sub Section "Tempory Hinge Tiedowns" on page 212: Item 12 has a quantity of 12 ea tiedowns, the specification says there is only one at pier 17 and plan sheets show 3 tendons. How are are the hinge tiedowns measured and paid ?

Please See Addendum #5.

66. Ref. Item 37 & 38 and plan page 126: These items are for structure excavation bridge hazardous and contaminated which we assume to be at abutment 1 however we are unable to find any limits of payment in the plans. We need them to quantify the work. What or where are they?

Please See Addendum #5.

67. Ref. Specification section 10-1.28 the last paragraph: The specification indicates that all compensation for dredging shall be paid for in structure excavation (D). Shouldn't this be structure excavation (A)?

Please see Addendum #6.

68. Ref. Bid item 8 and Specification section 10-1.03 "Overhead". The specification indicates time related overhead will be paid as a lump sum. This is probably correct when the implications of an A+B bid are considered. However, bid item 8 indicates 1100 Wday. Which is it?

Please See Addendum #5.

69. Ref. plan page 125: Under "General Notes Load Factor Design" the Structrual Concrete Bridge Footing concrete indicates f 'c = 35 MPa @ 28 days. Why is this noted this way? Are the other strengths used in the design and listed here not 28 day strengths? If not then how many days? If the design is based on f 'c of more than 28 days can the specifications be changed so the f 'c for acceptance is also based on the same. Slower strength gain mixes would help in controlling the internal temperatures required by the Mass Concrete specification. Is this your intent?

Please See Addendum #5.

70. Ref. Specification section 90-4.08 "Required use fo Mineral Admixtures": It is our understanding that the source of reactive aggregate problems in concrete usually comes from the large aggregate and that light weight aggregate is basically inert. If this is the case why does this specfication apply to the all concrete and not just the normal weight concrete? Mineral admixtures retard early strength gain and this is a segmental project requiring high early strengths to stress and move the form travellers.

Mineral admixtures also impart desireable properties to the concrete. Furthermore, due to the high cement contents that will be
required to obtain the specified lightweight properties, strength gain should not be an issue. Please also note the changes to Standard
Specification Section, 90-4.08 "REQUIRED USE OF MINERAL ADMIXTURES" that are included in the special provisions.

71. Ref. Specification section 10-1.45 Sub section "Practice Placement" on page 194: The second paragraph indicates that during the practice placement the air content, penetration and unit mass weight of the concrete will be measured before and after pumping. Where will this testing be done during production work? If the testing done after pumping will it be the basis for acceptance or rejection? Getting a slick line full of concrete rejected is a little more serious than just turning a truck back.

If the Contractor elects to pump the production lightweight concrete, testing will be at the end of the pump line. Please also note
that the maximum penetration requirements of the Standard Specifcations have been eliminated for the lightweight concrete.

72. Ref: plan page 289 Pretressing Note 10 & 16 and standard specification section 50-1.05 paragraph 12: Note 16 states that all tendons must be stressed prior to moving the form traveler and we know a stress analysis of the segment just cast would verify the need. Note 10 appears to say the same thing in regards to grout strength prior to moving but it does not say that you have to grout the segment that was just stressed. The minimum 20 MPa grout strength prior to moving a form traveler and the 10 day limitation to
grout in the standard specification can be met if applied 1 segment behind the active work heading and is typical in segmental specifications. Plus the vibrations caused by moving the form traveler on ungrouted tendons releases friction and distributes the force more uniformily along the tendon. We understand the limitation of loading activity on green grout but are you trying to say we have to grout the segment just cast and stressed?

Note 10 does not imply that the grouting must follow the casting and stressing of each segment. It does, however, limit traveler
movement on green grout when the Contractor has recently grouted. Note also that depending on the number of segments the Contractor constructs between grouting operations, corrosion inhibiter in the ducts may be required in accordance with Section 50-1.05, of the Standard Specifications.

73. The following work catagories have specification sections but there are no bid items nor do we find any work on the plans.
          Section 10-1.71 Slope Paving
          Section "Contaminated & Hazardous Material Excavation" on page 122 has payment instructions for structure excavation Slag and Cinder.
          Section 10-1.23 Temporary crash Cushion Module

Please See Addendum #4

74. Ref. Specification 8-3.02 and 10-1.51: Paragraph 20 requires a QA program to be ISO 9001, MIL-Q-9858A or MIL-I-45208A or equal yet paragrapgh 9 and section 8-3.02 requires the welding to by to meet a AISC Quality Certification program. Which is correct or applies?

Both apply, welding QA and bearing (design, manufacturing,inspection and testing) QA are two seperate issues.

75. Ref Specification 10-1.53: I am being told by US bearing manufactures that the requirements of 3 years experience on 2 projects is a problem. Bearings with load measuring devices, preloading cababliity and sweeps are very unique and have not been built in this country very often, if ever. The use of manufactures out of the country is precluded by the Buy American specification. Please give us a list of bearing manufactures that will meet specification.

The experience requirements only refer to size, load capacity, configuration and movement capability, not to the preloading, load measuring and sweeps capabilities.

76. Ref plan pages 201,207 & 208: The stem thickness on these plus other drawings is detailed as 550mm horizontal. When the actual exterior stem slope is calculated it is found to vary from 1:3.710 which yields an actual stem thickness of 531mm at segment 13S on the Pier 15 to 1:6.226 which yields an actual stem thickness of 543m at segment 1S on Pier 8. This is a change of 12mm in stem thickness on the same +- typical section. The thickness even changes up to 3mm in one of the cantilevers. Was this your intent or should the 550mm dimension have been perpeendicular to the stem which is typical Caltrans detailing practice?

The 550mm dimension, shown horizontally, is correct as shown on plans.

77. Ref: Contractors Inquiry Responses question 3. When will the prebid meeting be held?

Please see Addendum #1

78. Do to the magnitude and complexity of this project and the questions asked by us and others we formally requests that the bid opening be postponed at least 1 month.

Please see Addendum #2

79. Please reference page 246 (paragraph 11 & 12) of the special provisions & Sheet 176 & 176B of the contract drawings;
Paragraph 11 & 12 provide the lengths for the sample bar & control bar to be used for testing of the “Ultimate But Splice’s” which states for bar’s larger than #29: 2M for the sample bar and 1.5M for the control bar which is adjacent to the splice bar, you must also allow approximately 300mm for the end prep of the bars that need to be repaired. All of this must be located outside of the “NO SPLICE ZONE” These total up to 4.1M, as shown on sheet 176 & 176B they have provided a splice zone of 1.5M just above the tip elevation of the Steel casing. The 1.5M is adequate to achieve these testing requirements, therefore all ultimate splices in the vertical reinforcement must be made in the area shown on these sheets as “Distance B”. To achieve this we have calculated that the shortest length of bar reinforcement required will be 24.384M (80’-0”) and the longest length will be 33.528M (110’-0”) The 1.5M splice zone must be increased to 4.1M, if not, then is it the designers intent to use up to 33.528 (110’-0”) long bar reinforcing?

If a sample bar length and control bar length with the additional end prepartaion lengths are taken downwards beginning in the 1500mm zone, the length of replacement bar section will have to be long enough to get the new additional splice out of the 7030mm long "no splice zone area" below the 1500mm zone. To do this, a piece of replacement bar of at least 7030mm will be required. We do not agree that continuous reinforcing of the lengths suggested is required by the plan details.

80. Please reference sheet 176 & 176B of the contract drawings; Section B-B & C-C call for a #25 spacer hoop to separate the L1 & L2 vertical bars. We could eliminate these bars if Caltrans would allow us to use a three bar bundle, please clarify.

The bar reinforcing shall remain as detailed.

81. Please reference sheet 167 & 168 of the contract drawings (typical of all similar conditions); These sheets call for a #32 T-headed bar to be mechanical spliced at the C.J. of the pre-cast wall and the stage 2 concrete. Being that all these bars are to be epoxy coated and one halve of the mechanical splice shall be embedded into concrete; how is the shrink tube to be applied, do we apply halve of a shrink tube in the poured concrete and the other halve when the connection is made? Is their any provision covering these types of mechanical connections with epoxy coating? Please clarify.

The location of the splice is not detailed and is not required to be one-half in and one-half out of the construction joint. The bar should be stubbed out from the construction joint with a length that will enable it to be spliced and covered with the sleeve.

82. Please reference sheet 438 & 440 of the contract drawings; These sheets call for mechanical couplers as required for the skirt reinforcing. Note 6 on sheet 438 reads as follows “All couplings, bolts and lag bolts shall be ASTM A276, Type 316 stainless steel” does this include the couplers for the Bar Reinforcing Steel? Please clarify.

The note is intended for all the hardware that will attach the RRP lumber to the concrete not the bar reinforcing couplers attaching the skirt to the pier footing. Note that the concrete embedded coupler and anchor for the RRP lumber shown in Detail A on Project Plan sheet 437 is required to be ASTM A276, Type 316 stainless steel.

83. We are requesting that Caltrans issue an official notice or addendum indicating the actual status of this project as it pertains to a future addendum and postponement of the bid date. The rumor on the street is that there are major changes to the structure and that there will be an extension in the bid date. This has caused a slow down with suppliers and subcontractors. This is also slowing down the activity of the General Contractors as we don't know what exactly are the planned changes to the project and how it will affect the approach to the project. Due to the above, we are requesting that information be released this week as to the status, and that a bid extension of 6 weeks be granted.

Please see Addendum #2

84. We are interested in bidding a project for the New Benicia/Martinez Bridge but we are having trouble finding where we would order plans from?

Please see the following web site for ordering bid documents :
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/project_status/order_bid_location.html

85. Ref. Standard Specification 2-1.056 "State Employees & Design Engineers may not bid on Construction Contract": Can an engineering firm which has provided design services for this project provide construction analysis, geometry, camber, integrated lift drawing engineering, etc. for the contractor or one of his subcontactors?

No.

86. In the report "Evaluation of Pile Drivability - Benicia Martinez Bridge Suisun Bay, California" by Fugro-McClelland Marine Geosciences, there is reference to the Wave Equation Analyses that were run for the D-100, IHC S-200, S-500, Vulcan 560 and Menck 3000 hammers. Are copies of the complete analyses available?

The only information available is that contained in the referenced report.

87. Page 157, of the special provisions, calls out the need for dynamic monitoring. Is this dynamic monitoring to cover 5 piles, including the load test pile, or 4 piles, including the load test pile? In addition, based on the requirements outlined, in the Order of Work, on page 82, the first permanent location is at Pier 9. Is this correct?

Response to 87: Four (4) piles will be dynamically monitored, this includes the first load test pile. If the Contractor's permanent steel casing installation method is by driving at all locations, then the following permanent steel casings will be monitored: The first load test pile, the first pile at Pier 6, the first pile at Pier 10 and a fourth pile randomly selected by the Engineer. Pier 9, which includes a first order of work production pile, would only have a monitored pile if it is selected by the Engineer as the fourth location to be monitored.

.88. The last sentence of Note 4 on drawing 176 B of 557 is in contradiction with the drawing on the same sheet and also with the "Removal" paragraph on page 157 of the special provisions. Please clarify.

Please See Addendum #5

89. Drawing page 151 of 557 shows the bottom of footing elevations for the retaining wall footings at abutment one. The respective stepped footings are at different elevations, east side to west side. On sheet 183 of 557 "Pile footing section for H = 7800" and section A-A the bottom of the strap beam is shown at the same elevation as the retaining wall footing. With the strap beam intersecting both east and west footing there must be a step in the strap beam or a sloping grade to it. Please advise.

The tie beams are sloped between the different footing elevations.

90. When will the Test Boring information be available @ the Benicia Test Pile site?

The Log of Test Borings for the Load Test Pile Location are included in the advertised plans, please see Project Plan sheet Nos. 556, 557 and 557A of the plan set.

91. Why can't the steel shell @ the test site be driven to 2M above existing ground instead of 5.5M as the conc. is only poured to -1.5M below original ground.

The test pile serves a dual purpose, it is also intended to demonstrate the Contractor's ability to handle and install a pile equal in most respects to the roduction piles. The stickup above ground level is similar to the stickup above the tide level for the production casings.

92. We would like to order, or get the information on how to order, the following documents: The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits CAS000002 and CAS000003, issued by the State Water Resource Control Board.

93. We would like to order, or get the information on how to order the following: All water removed from excavations and dewatering operations in conformance with this section shall be handled as provided in Effulent Treatment Systems elsewhere in this specification and in accordance with the discharge permit for contaminated groundwater issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board.

94. We would like to order, or get information on how to order the following : Groundwater samples shall be made available to the bidders for conducting bench-scale assessments of proposed treatment systems. The request shall include the quantity required for the assessment.

For all parties that have requested the groundwater samples, the samples will be available for pickup on Wednesday July 11, 2001 at 10:00am. Please meet Charles Smith, of Caltrans, at the front gate to Rhodia , Inc, located at 100 Mococo Road , Martinez, CA.
95. We would like to order, or get information on how to order the following: "Sediment Sampling and Analysis Report, New Benicia-Martinez Bridge Project, Contra Costa and Solano Counties, CA" dated June 1999 and prepared by Caltrans District 4 Environmental Branch and Geocon Environmental.

The "Sediment Sampling and Analysis Report" for this project are available for purchase at Blue Print Services, Oakland, CA., Tel. No. 510-287-5485. They are also available for viewing by appointment with the Duty Senior, Tel. No. 510-286-5549.

96. Referencing the Materials Handout - "Access Trestle Foundation Recommendations". In this report reference is made to Access Trestle Layout Plans No.1, 2 and 3 (dated August 2, 2000). Could we get a copy of these plans?

The plans were never completed and therefore not available.

97. Are splices permitted in the CIDH test pile steel casing?

Yes, the load test pile casings may be spliced.

98. Reference to sheet #302. Are the "future maintenance" anchors spaced at 2550 or 4800mm o/c? Elevation shows 4800 (typ) while sections show 2550. Please clarify.

Please See Addendum #5

99. Section 10-1.11 on page 98, "Non-Storm Water Discharge", of the special provisions, indicates that the disposal of contaminated groundwater is to be covered in bid item #15. Page 123 of the special provision states that the control and disposal of groundwater is to be part of the various bid items of excavation and backfill. Which is correct?

Please See Addendum #4

100. The second to last paragraph, on page 101 of the special provisions, states we are to submit assessment results with our proposal. Is this correct?

Please see Addendum #6.

101. Special Provisions page 127 states there is an aquatic disposal site called the Carquinez Strait Dredged Material Disposal Site (DMDS, SF-9). Where is this site located?

The disposal site location map can be found at the following web site:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/index.html?Ben-Mar/006034/MaterialsHandout/MaterialsList.html

102. The special provisions state that the company Pier Technology needs to be used as a supplier of materials. Does the use of this supplier cause conflict with the ‘Buy America’ clause for the overall contract?

No.

103. 5. Currently, there is a time range of July 1 ? October 31, that construction can be completed in the waterway, based on permit number 1-1-96-F-40 issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Since the date of the bid proposal has changed to July 17, 2001, will there be a completion date adjustment, as the timing of being able to construct the trestles before October 31st will require the contractor to lose the first window of time? In essence, a contractor is not going to have ample time to utilize the 2001 work window due to the change in bid date.

Please See Addendum #5

104. The piling in-fill concrete is specified as mass concrete. Do the post-cooling requirements apply in this situation?

Yes, at least for the first pile, however, as allowed by the special provisions, if the system is not activated and the temperatures are maintained within the specified limits then future pile installations need not have a post-cooling system installed provided conditions remain similar.

105. Sheet L-1 shows the temporary construction easement, as well as the right of way. On the Benicia side, the temporary construction easement allows a path for access to the new bridge. Please distinguish what areas are available to the contractor during construction on the Benicia side.

Please see Addendum #6.

106. Since the cementitious content has a significant affect on the maximum concrete temperature, wouldn't it be more appropriate to have the concrete mixes designed to meet compressive strength requirements at 56 days rather than 28 days? This is the recommendation of CTL, in their report dated May 14, 1999, page 7 of the Material Handout.

This is already allowed for the mass concrete elements of the bridge, see special provision section 8-2.01 , "Portland Cement Concrete."

107. Please clarify where to order the following documents: Rules of U.S. Army Permit and the Contaminated Materials Rules from page 54 of the specifications.

Hazardous waste rules and regulations can be obtained at the following sources:

Code of Federal Regulations

US Government Printing Office (http://www.access.gpo.gov)
online access - http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html

California Code of Regulations

The CCR is available at the offices of County Clerks or County Law Libraries and 100 state depository libraries. It is available in looseleaf form from the publisher, West Group. For information, contact West Group at 1-800-888-3600.

online access - http://ccr.oal.ca.gov/

Cal-OSHA regulations are also available at http://www.dir.ca.gov/DOSH/dosh1.html

California Health and Safety Code

online access - http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

Additional information can be found at the following sources:

California Environmental Protection Agency

http://www.calepa.ca.gov/

Bay Area Air Quality Management District

http://www.baaqmd.gov/

Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 2

http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb2/index.html
\

108. Hinge A,B Details (Sheet #246) notes "Elastomeric bumper, total 14. For design data, See "Hinge A,B Details No. 8" sheet". However looking at sheet #248, I only count 4 bumpers. Are there 4 or 14 bumpers?

Please See Addendum #5

109.Special provisions on "Hydrographic Surveys", p.128, states that "pre- and post-dredging and quality control surveys" are required. Dredging is not allowed outside the pier locations per specification. Those piers that do require structural excavation to construct will be within cofferdams. A hydrographic survey as specified is not practical within the limits of the cofferdams. Is the intent to perform these surveys every month outside the limits of the cofferdams? Will more conventional methods of checking the grades within the cofferdams be allowed? Will a survey be required to confirm contours before each cofferdam is installed and after each is removed? Please clarify so that this work can be accurately estimated.

Hydrographic survey as specified will not be required within the cofferdams and pile. Conventional methods of checking the grade within cofferdams will be allowed pending Engineer's approval.

110. I have a question as to why certain TIFF files in the 04-006034 project plans folder are rotated 90 degrees, as compared to other plans in the same

folder. EXAMPLE:

Files 04-006031_0001.tif to 04-006031_0098.tif are oriented in the same fashion.

Files 04-006031_0099.tif to 04-006031_0102.tif are oriented 90 degrees different than the normal.

Can you make the TIFF's for said project available in a consistent orientation?

The "TIF" files have been corrected.

111. Was there a Bill of Materials for the rebar for project 04-006034 or if we had to do a Take Off.

A bill of materials or bar listing is not provided by Caltrans and Contractor is required to do his own take-offs to obtain breakdowns of the quantities.

112. Is there was any percentage fo the rebar which did not have to be purchased domestically as per the Buy America stipulations.

The Buy America provisions are covered in the special provisions , Section 5-1.075.

113. RE Contract No. 04-006034, could not Caltrans pre-order 2/75' Caissons complete with lower internal shear rings (2.582 x .041mm) on tip section to expidite test pile installation.

No. Note that we do require the casing ordering to be a first order of work for the Contractor.

114. I am looking for the rebar quantity breakdown for this project. Item 97 provides a quantity of 21,930,000 KG for non-epoxy coated while item 98 provides the quantity 4,600,000 KG for the epoxy coated portion. There are two additional rebar descriptions without quantity. I would like to find the break down on the quantities with each type of rebar so that I might prepare our bid package for this portion of the project.

CLARIFICATION : What are the weights of items #99 and #100. Are there take-off quantities on items #97, 98, 99, 100?

Please See Response to #111.

115. Please see drawings 367 and 369 of 557. Drawings on page 367 "HINGE A, B DETAILS NO. 6". Drawing 369 "HINGE A, B DETAILS NO.8". Please clarify.

See response to bidder inquiry No. 108.

116. Concerning the treatment of contaminated groundwater at Pier 5, the special provisions, p. 101, provides a table of the minimum allowable concentration of metals in the discharge water. The spec does not provide sample concentrations of the water at the site. I understand that the Rhodia treatment plant has provided this information to Caltrans. Could you please provide this information to the bidders so that we can more accurately estimate the cost of the water treatment. Note that the concentration of the water at the start of treatment will have a significant impact on the cost of the treatment process.

117. Concerning the requirements specified under the "mass concrete" specification, the construction section states that "after the mass concrete pour has been topped out and finished it shall be revibrated and refinished...as late as the concrete will again respond to vibration. The pier tables and 1st four segments in any cantilever are included under this specification. We are assuming that revibration would only apply to the thick diaphragm section of the pier table. evibration of the top and bottom slabs and segment walls is impractical in segmental construction, especially with the hot concrete mix design specified. The top and bottom slabs must be finished immediately after placement. Please confirm thatthis is the intent of the specification.

The intent of the specification is that mass concrete be revibrated prior to initial set to eliminate cracking, voids and weak areas that can be created by post placement settlement and bleeding of the thicker sections of concrete. This would include the top and bottom slabs of the initiial segments of each cantilevber, as specified. Please also note the lesser ordinary surface finish that is required for the deck of the segments due to the subsequent required full surface deck grinding.

118. Please refer to questions #14 and #48 regarding the "B" portion of the "A + B" bidding format. Questions asking caltrans to define a value for the "B" portion have been asked for more than two months now, without a response from caltrans. The value of the schedule and the costs associated with producing a faster schedule are an integral part of preparing this estimate. Please answer the questions immediately.

Please See Addendum #4

119. Concerning the future maintenance platform traveler ferrule inserts, contract plan sheet 423 of 557 details the inserts to be galvanized. Special provisions sheet 270 states that "all metal parts of anchorage devices shall be fabricated from stainless steel". Please clarify if traveler inserts are to be galvanized or stainless steel.

In the case of conflicts, the special provisions govern over the plans, the inserts should be stainless steel.
Please See Addendum #5

120. Utility plans show a number of utilities that are to be removed. Can we assume that these removals are all by others, and that they will be removed before construction begins?

Please See Addendum #4

121. Questions 16 and 92 of the contractor’s inquiry responses dated April 23, 2001, is in reference to the NPDES Permits CAS000002 and CAS000003. The website, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/project_ads_addenda/04/04-0060034, only shows plans, specifications, and addenda information. In addition, the Materials Handout website referenced in question 2 of the contractor’s inquiry responses, doesn’t include these permits (http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/index.html?Ben-Mar/006034/MaterialsList.html). Please clarify where these permits can be viewed, read and obtained.

122. Question 55 of the contractor’s inquiry responses dated April 23, 2001, is in reference to permits including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service File No. 1-1-96-F-40. The website, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/project_ads_addenda/04/04-0060034, doesn’t include this permit. The Materials Handout website referenced in question 2 of the contractor’s inquiry responses, (http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/index.html?Ben-Mar/006034/MaterialsList.html), includes an addenda to this permit, along with a biological opinion section. The information in question is the actual permit.

Please See Addendum #4

123. The San Francisco Bay conservation and Development Commission Permit (Section 1.A). Are the temporary construction trestles and falsework listed as being “within the 100 foot shoreline band” part of the 103,700 square feet of pile supported fill listed as being in “partially in the Bay and partially in the Primary Management Area of the Suisun Marsh”? Or, is this in addition?

No, this is in addition.

124. The BCDC (Section 1.A.e) permit states that the 103,700 square feet includes falsework. What falsework is included in this quantity? Is it to include the falsework for the Cast in Place box girders sections on the main structure?

Yes, and refer to Addendum #6.

125. Bid Item #25 ? Temporary Retaining Wall, is specified as a wall that the contractor determines the wall design as well as the required wall amount. Shouldn’t this item be either a final pay quantity or a lump sum item?

Please see Addendum #6.

126. Bid Item 6 ? Roadway Excavation (Hazardous) and Bid Item 7 ? Roadway Excavation (Contaminated): The Site Investigation report Volume 1 and 2 deal with the excavation in the roadway areas. Please provide an explanation of how the quantities and mapping of the area were derived. Our interpretation of the bore logs, for the designated areas, generates a significantly different quantity for these two bid items.

Please see Addendum #6.

127. On page 286, section 10-1.90- Seismic monitoring, of the special provisions, it says that the contractor has to install casing in the vicinity of Pier 8. It is not clear if this location will be on the footing or elsewhere.

Please see Addendum #7,

128. In section 10-1.76 payment section of the special provisions, it says that the lump sum price shall include the cost of inspection platforms complete in place. Drawing 423 of 557 shows the inspection platforms as dashed lines and refers to the outside platforms as future maintenance platforms. Are we required to furnish & install only the inside platforms and do we need to furnish a platform for each cantilever construction span (12 total)?

Please See Addendum #5

129. Present experience at the construction of the New Carquinez Bridge project, just a few miles east, from the New Benicia Martinez bridge, has shown the risks associated with the construction of large diameter rock sockets in the existing 'bedrock'. Area's with dipping angles, greater than 60 deg, appeared to be to unstable for conventional rock socket > construction, using a synthetic slurry. The holes caved in during the construction process. In order to prepare a competitive proposal we would like to know if the owner is going to cover the risk of cave-in of rock sockets to be constructed in mediate to highly fractured material with dipping angles greater than 60 deg.?

Please See Addendum #4

130. Can the contractor modify the diameter of the large diameter rock sockets, with out changing the reinforcement, in order to reduce the risk, and optimize the drilling process.

Please See Addendum #4

131. Please see drawing [423 of 557] "MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS NO. 8" shows an outline of the Maintenance Traveler Systerm the contractor is to design, detail, fabricate, install, and test. Is this traveler system (Bid Item 125) foiund in every bridge span (16 total travellers)?

Please See Addendum #5

132. Assuming the project is built as shown on the plans, can Caltrans clarify the split of design responsibility between Caltrans and the Contractor?

Contractor's design responsibility shall be for modifications to the plans and or design of the structure due to his choice of prestressing systems or construction methods.

133. Page 206 of the Special Provisions. Item (B) Design Calculations indicates the Contractor shall submit full allowable stress and ultimate strength calculations. Does this mean the Contractor shall assume design responsibility for the bridge?

Submittal of calculations is standard practice for segmental construction. The Contractor's design responsibility shall be for modifications to the plans and or design of the structure due to his choice of prestressing systems or construction methods. Please note however, that on this project, because of the monolithic connection between the superstructure and piers, the substructure is affected by the construction sequence adopted by the Contractor.

134. Page 206 of the Special Provisions. Item (B) Design Calculations indicates the Contractor shall submit full allowable stress and ultimate strength calculations. Are these available for the design shown on the plans?

No, however as stated in the referenced section, the Engineer will provide superstructure and substructure live load and seismic forces, as well as the maximum unbalanced loading forces on the piers.

135. Plan sheet 311 of 433. Note 1 indicates the construction sequence is incomplete. What is needed to complete it?

The Contractor's specific construction method and sequences, which are much more detailed than those shown on the plans, will be needed to complete the construction sequence.

136. Page 216 of teh Special Provisions. One of the allowable modifications that require a CRIP is the construction sequence. Will completing the construction sequence shown on teh plans constitute a CRIP? Will Caltrans back charge the Contractor for Caltrans review of the completed construction sequence?

Evaluation of the more detailed construction sequence, assumed in the design, for the Contractor's equipment and methods will not be considered as part of a CRIP. The Contractor will not be responsible for reimbursing the State for the costs of evaluating the construction sequence assumed in the design.

137. The web slope appears to vary between cantilever systems. Is it the intent of the designer to warp the sloped web surfaces within the closures?

The transitions occur within the span length as shown on the plans.

138. What movement ratings are required at Hinges A, B, C, D, and E?

The movement ratings (MR's) for the joints at the hinges are shown on sheets 406 and 407 of the project plans. Attention is also directed to Section 10-1.51, "Joint Seal Assemblies (Movement Rating Exceeding 100mm)," of the special provisions.

139. Hinges C and D. What are the load cases and design loads for these girder-restrained hinges.?

The hinges were designed for all group loadings, including seismic, in accordance with the Caltrans Bridge Design Specifications and the Project Specific Design Criteria.

140. Page 207 of the Specail Provisions. Where are items (B)2 and (B)3.

The number "4" should be "2", this is a typographical error. There is nothing missing from the section.

141. Are the temporary and permanent counterweights required for strength and serviceability of the completed structure, or are they required for construction?

They are required for both.

142. The CRIP specs appear to address the sharing cost savings only (Part A). How will Caltrans handle CRIPs that save time but not money (Part B)?

Please see Addendum #6.

143. Do the construction sequence and camber tables shown on the plans assume deck grinding or a polyester concrete overlay?

The camber tables and construction sequence shown on the plans assume that the added thickness of the deck to account for grinding is in place.

144. What is the required residual camber at the end of construction?

The required residual camber is shown in the notes on each "Camber Diagram" sheet of the plans. The equations defining the residual camber are shown in the "Residual Camber" detail shown on the "Camber Diagram P15" sheet, project plan sheet 230. The residual camber as defined in the referenced notes is the reserve or additional camber that should exist in the structure after 10 years. The camber at end of construction includes residual camber plus camber needed for time dependent effects. This number is given in Line 4 of the "Camber Diagram" sheets. Please also refer to section "Segmentally Erected Superstructure" of the special provisions for additional information on camber calculations required by the Contractor.

145. Drawing [417 of 557] "Miscellaneous Details No. 2 ": shows the pier shaft for Piers 8, 7, and 6 varies between 43000 and 41000 in height. Please confirm this is correct.

Please See Addendum #5

146. Do the stair flights have the same type of handrail on both sides?

Yes, the handrail is the same on both sides of the stairs. The rails shall be 32mm diameter standard pipe mounted 1000mm above the treads or platforms, as specified. The mounting of the rail posts shall be either to the stairs or the landings as detailed.

147. To whom it may concern; I find it hard to understand the response to Question 91 because the production pile (caisson) plan cut off is approx. 6' above mean tide, and only 3' +/- above mean high tide, but yet you suggest having a cut off 18' above ground line AKA " stick up " is " similar to the stick up above the tide level for the production caissons". Now, are we discussing the same contract or is there something going on here I am not privy to, perhaps a redesign? Could you kindly illuminate me on this subject as it will benefit both owners and contractors both to have easier access to the top of the test pile considering all the evolutions that have to take place after installation. Thank You

The original response neglected to state that the stickup also includes an added length to account for the required dynamic monitoring that will be performed. In addition, the overall length of the test pile casing, 45.5m, is the average length of all the casings that will be installed and thus: will be representative of the required lifting weight for handling purposes, and will be representative of the number of shop and or field splices that could be expected on the production piling. The stickup is correct as shown on the plans please bid it as shown.

148. Is it possible to find out in figures the traffic load on the future Mass Transit (One track of standard BART loading)?

As referenced in the project specific Design Criteria included on the first material handout CD, the design information for BART is included in the publication titled "San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Design Criteria" in Section 2, "Bart Train Loads".

149. According to sheets L-7 and G-1, the L-line is to conform to the existing access road at station 14+24.75, but the cross-sections continue to station 14+90.00. Please clarify which is correct.

Please see Addendum #6.

150. Page 122 of the special provisions refers to the following bid items - Structure Excavation (slag) and Structure Excavation (cinder). These two items do not exist on the bid form. Are these going to be added?

Please See Addendum #4

151. Please advise if this project received the funding from the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA), which was to occur in April of 2001. If this did not occur what is the status and will there be an immediate impact to the project and the current bid date of July 17, 2001?

Please see Addendum #6.

152. The current specifications will not allow the contractor to install temporary construction trestles to access piers 7 through 17. Without the use of trestles we will not be able to consider more appropriate methods ( ie Rotation and Oscillation) of installing the permanentsteel casing and rock sockets for pier foundations 7 through 17. We think Caltrans should explore the possibility of obtaining permission to install trestles to access piers 7 through 17. The ability to access piers 7 through 17 by barge or trestle will insure that the most economical pile installation method is presented by the contractor.

Trestle construction shall comply with contract requirements and all permits obtained for the project.

153. Other Toll Bridge Projects have had a bid item for "Establish Marine Access" , why does this project not have a similar item? The contractor will incur considerable costs before 5% of the original contract work is completed to activate payment on the mobilization item. If Caltrans is not willing to add an item for "Establish Marine Access", we request that the payment of the mobilization be modified to allow payment on the mobilization item in the amount of 20% after 2% of the original contract amount is earned.

"Establish Marine Access" is included as part of the mobilization and refer to Addendum #6.

154. Under Special Provision Section 101.41 Piling, Measurement and Payment (Piling), it is stated that additional permanent steel casing will be paid for as extra work as provided in Section 4-1.03D of the Standard Specifications. What if the Engineer elects to shorten the permanent steel casings, will that also be paid as extra work? Either lengthening or shortening of the permanent steel casing will be costly due to the fact that the ring plates and headed studs will not be in proper location relative to the fixed footing elevations. ONe solution would be to modify the scope of work to include test boring at each actual pier location to determine the exact elevation of the bedrock so that the permanent steel casings can be prefabricated to the proper length. Doing so will insure that the headed studs and ring plates are properly positioned at the fabrication facility and eliminate costly field modifications due to changed casing lengths.

The State does not anticipate raising or lowering the specified tips of the permanent steel casings, however, should it become necessary to do so, the Contractor's attention is directed to Section 4 of the Standard Specifications.

155. Drawing [159 of 557] "Footing Details, No. 3" notes to see drawing [195 of 557] "Pier Details No. 12" for information on temporary hinge tie-downs. A review of sheet 195 showed no information about these tie-downs.

Answer pending.

156. Drawing [184 of 557] "Pier Details No. 1" calls for "Temporary Hinge Tie-Downs Loop Anchors for 31-Dia 13 strands." Please provide more specific drawings and details regarding anchors and connections.

The only information available is that shown on the plans. Please also see the "Hinge A and B Details" sheets as well as the special provisions for additional information on the tiedowns. The design and detailing of the prestressing system is the responsibility of the Contractor.

157. Bid Item 17, Temporary Cover, is paid as a lump sum. The special provisions state that " the minimum quantity of temporary cover required for this project shall be 6,000 square meters". Caltrans will approve how much temporary cover is required on the job, therefore the contractor has no way of knowing prebid the quantity to include in our bid. Please change this bid item from lump sum to unit price, as you have for all but one of the other erosion control bid items.

Please see Addendum #6.

158. Bid Item 21, Temporary Entrance/Exit, is also paid as a lump sum. The special provisions state that "the minimum quantity of temporary entrance/exit required for this project shall be six". As with Temporary Cover, Caltrans will approve how many Temporary Entrance/Exits are required. Please also change this bid item from lump sum to unit price.

Please see Addendum #6.

159. Reference: -Special Provision 10-1.41, page 172 Measurement and Payment (Piling), paragraph 12. -Plan Sheets 55 & 58 of 433

Inquiry: Note 4 on sheet 55 states that permanent casings shall be advanced to the elevations indicated but not less than 1500 mm into rock. The above referenced special provision states that “Additional permanent steel casing … required to extend the permanent steel casing to into bedrock … will be paid for as extra work”. Please confirm that this extra work includes the cost to procure and field splice additional casing, costs to modify and/or fabricate new ring plates, guide bars, and headed studs for the casing top detail, and all other cost and time impacts which result from adding permanent steel casing to the lengths shown on the plans.

Yes, the referenced costs will be covered by the extra work payment.

160. Will the contractor have bridge toll relief for trips across the existing bridge?

No.

161. The specifications for the referenced contract calls for the contractor to handle and stockpile or dispose of contaminated materials. It is not possible to adequately price in a construction contract the risks and liabilities inherent in handling and disposing of such materials due to the existing hazardous waste laws. While we can accept the obligation to properly handle and dispose of the material, once the contractor has done so in accordance with the plans and specifications he should not carry the long term liability associated with assuming the role of "generator" from the Owner. Sections 5-1.36 and 5-1.28 state that "the Engineer will obtain the United States Environmental Protection Agency Identification Number and sign all manifests as the Generator." We understand these provisions to mean that the Contractor is not intended to have responsibility for the material in place and shall not be obligated for further cleanup, removal or remedial action for the materials once stockpiled at the Engineer approved site or properly disposed of at the Engineer approved site. This would, of course, except materials the Contractor has introduced to the jobsite himself. Please acknowledge that we have interpreted each parties responsibilities correctly.

Yes, you have interpreted each party's responsibilities correctly.

162. Ref: Pre-Award Qualification Questionaire (Question # 2): You ask if the bidder or the bidders assigned personnel have been cited by any goverment agency for safety violations. We assume you mean that after review and appeal has the bidder actually been found to be in violation and had to pay a fine. Is this correct?

Please bid according to plans and specifications.

163. Ref: Pre-Award Qualification Questionaire (Question # 5): You ask the bidder to describe plans for dealing with a catastrophic event at one of the nearby refineries or chemical plants. By DEAL we are assuming that you mean how do we plan protect our people and train them to assist in that effort and not how do we plan to go help solve the problem. Is this correct? Also please define NEARBY. Is it 1/4, 1, ? miles from the R/W? We have talked to the people at the Rhodia plant which is within the R/W but haven't put anyone on the ground yet to knock on doors because we don't know how far we need to range. We are assuming that the methods these plants use to protect their own employees will be sufficient for ours. Is this correct?

Please bid according to plans and specifications.

164. Ref. Pre-Award Qualification Questionaire (Question # 9): What do the first two questions mean? In accordance with the CRIP specification the bridge we bid on must be per plans & specifications. The sequence shown on the plans and 5 sets for formtravelers. Are you asking us what we will or MIGHT be trying to CRIP?

Please bid according to plans and specifications.

165. Ref: Pre-Award Qualification Questionaire: Is it really neccessary to submit this information with the bid? You are asking for a lot of detail and in some cases their is more than one method that will work but it will not be know until just prior to the bid which method is most competative.

Yes.

166. The bid schedule, Item 86 through Item 89, calls for PTFE Spherical Bearings of 380 mm, 480 mm, 600 mm and 815 mm diameter. The PTFE Schedule on Sheet 405 calls for bearings of 395 mm, 530 mm, 600 mm and 800 mm diameter. Please clarify the 380 mm and 480 mm diameter PTFE Bearings. What are the correct sizes?

Please See Addendum #4

167. Is it possible to get the plan holder's list in Excel format for these projects?

No, it's only on file maker pro file. You may fax in a request to 916-654-7028, and we will fax a copy of the list you have requested.

168. Section 10-1.01 "Order of Work", Paragraph 13, Line 2 states … “After a successful pile load test, a first order of work shall be the construction of the middle pile of the southern side of the Pier 9 pile group. This pile shall pass all acceptance tests, with concrete placed to the bottom of footing elevation, prior to proceeding with any other 2.5m or 2.6m cast-in-drilled-hole concrete piling on the project, including permanent steel casing installation”. This requirement eats up a tremendous amount of time on the critical path. Additionally, for the float-in system recommended by the Department, this pile would have to be driven through the pre-cast pile cap since it would be impossible to float the cap over an installed pile. This eats up even more time on the critical path. Would the department entertain the continued driving of permanent steel casings while this operation is going on? Pile hammers for this project rent at upwards of $100,000 a month, even when they are sitting idle waiting on the other systems to be proofed.

Please See Addendum #4

169. Section 10-1.41 "Piling: Permanent Steel Casing: General, Paragraph 4 on page 149 states…” Permanent steel casing shall have driving shoes as indicated on the plans and as specified in these special provisions. The driving shoe thickness and length shall be designed by the Contractor based on the Contractor’s proposed installation method and driving equipment, but shall not be less than the minimum thickness and length shown on the plans.” The plans show a minimum thickness of 60mm but no minimum length. Please specify the minimum length of the driving shoe.

Please See Addendum #5

170. Section 10-1.41 Piling: Cast-in-Drilled-Hole Concrete Piles: Construction, Paragraph 1 on page 166 states… “The Contractor may not drill adjacent cast-in-drilled-hole concrete piling simultaneously and concrete shall have been placed at a level at least 1.0 meter into the permanent steel casing or to the cut off elevation for piles without permanent steel casing and allowed to cure for a minimum of 2 days before beginning drilling or temporary casing installation on any piling immediately adjacent to another piling”. Please confirm that the above provision does not preclude the driving of adjacent permanent steel casing as long as drilling has not commenced on the first pile. In other words, please confirm that we can drive out all the permanent casings in any given pier at one time, as long as we have not commenced drilling operations in any of the piles in that footing.

The interpretation is correct, the Contractor may drive out all of the casings in any given footing as long as drilling operations have not commenced on any of the piles in that pier footing.

171. The Information Handout refers to as-built pile installation records for the Benicia Bridge Retrofit on page 652 of the document. Will these as-built pile driving records and rock socket drilling logs be available?

Please See Addendum #4

172. Per your request and in accordance with the Special Provisions , Section 10-1.11 NON-STORM WATER DISCHARGES, EFFLUENT TREATMENT SYSTEMS, page 101, paragraph 9, "Groundwater samples shall be made available to the bidders for conducting bench-scale assessments of proposed treatment systems upon request", we are formally requesting two gallons of groundwater that is representative of the water to be treated under this section of the contract. Please return email a time and place where we can pick these samples up. Time is of the essence as our assessment must be submitted with the bidder's proposal.

173. Please advise by the end of next week the status of the following:
a. Answers to the questions asked to date. Some questions are 60 days old.
b. The design changes that prompted the change in the bid date.
c. Any change to the completion date due to the fact that the contractor is
not going to have sufficient amount of time to install the temporary
trestles and cofferdams at piers 6, 16 and 17. Fish window is only 7/31
to 10/31 so a large part of this time will be lost in 2001.
d. Financing for this project from all participating agencies.
e. New bid date."

Please See Addendum #5

174. What submittals will the Contractor be required to submit prior to the installation of the temporary trestles and the cofferdams at piers 6,16, and 17?

Please see Addendum #7.

175. Drawing 58 shows a detail of a driving shoe for the casings. Is a shoe required for all of the casings? If so what is the length of the shoe? Is the specified tip that the casing is to reach measured at the top of the shoe or at the tip of the shoe?

Please note paragraph 8 of 10-1.41 "Piling" in the Special Provisions, which addresses the specified tip issue when shoes are used. Also note the first paragraph in 10-1.41 "Piling", subsection "Permanent Steel Casing Oscillation, Rotation and Vibration" regarding when the driving shoe may be omitted. The length of the shoe is to be determined by the Contractor.

176. Is it possible to do a live web broadcast of the Benicia Martinez (04-06034) bid opening, similar to the highly successful Richmond - San Rafael Toll Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project bid opening?

Yes, it will be broadcast.

177. The contract plans infer that the phase 1 precast portion of the footings is designed to float. When the weight of the reinforcing steel is included, our calculations indicate that the precast tub is too heavy to float. Will the contractor be allowed to increase the height of the precast walls to a point that the tub will float?

The plans do not imply that the precast pier footing forms were designed to float or to be stable when floating, nor was it part of the project specific design criteria. The reinforcing in the precast walls was designed for the loading and crack control conditions shown on the plans. A proposal to change the wall height will be considered by the Engineer, refer to the "Precast Pier Footing Forms" section of the special provisions.

178. The contract plans present a construction sequence for piers 6, 16 and 17 footings where the footing is constructed with a precast tub and lowered into place. Our analysis is in agreement with your conclusion that the bay bottom can not support a conventional seal slab and cast-in-place footing. Precasting the footing and lowering is significantly more expensive than casting the footing in place with a seal slab. Is it possible that the footing can be cast in place in lifts to minimize soil pressure?

No, the engineer will not approve of casting the precast pier footing form base slabs using horizontal construction joints.

179. In the Health Monitoring special provisions, please provide the number of locations that you require testing for the strain gage and concrete temperature monitoring.

Please see sheet 433 of 557.

180. With regards to the construction of the temporary trestles out to Piers 6,16, and 17 the following information is requested:
- What is the anticipated date for the Notice to Proceed of the contract?
- In order to complete the trestles by October 31, 2001, what effort towards expediting the submittal process will Caltrans guarantee? Can we expect to see a rapid turn around on submittals as they relate to the trestles and the cofferdams for Piers 6,16, and 17?
- What part of the approval process do the various other agencies have with regards to the submittals?
The concern is that if a contractor doesn’t have the access provided by the trestles that the next nearest access point for most bidders will be miles from the project and a major impact on time and cost will be felt. Part B of A+B proposal will be effected. The present completion dates do not allow for waiting until July 31, 2002 to gain marine access at the site.

Please see Addendum #7.

181. Are all the state-furnished permits required for the project in place?

Yes.

182. We need to know, in the absence of an existing prevailing wage structure, what the prevailing wage determination will be for:
1. Crewboat Operators
2. Crewboat Deckhands
3. Tugboat Captains
4. Tugboat Deckhands
5. Tugboat Engineers (unlicensed)
Crewboats/water taxis involve the transport of personnel equipment and supplies to the job site, but are not directly involved in construction operations.
Tugboats will be involved in supply of materials to the job site, and may be required to position construction equipment around the job site, but once again will not be directly involved in construction operations.

Answer pending

183. Please clarify what bumpers are to be paid for in bid item 92. Do Elastomeric Bearing Pads Type 1 at Hinges C & D pay with this item?

There are no "Elastomeric Bearing Pads Type 1" shown on the plans at Hinges C and D, there are Type 1 bearings and these are shown on the "Bearing Details" sheets. Please also refer to the special provisions regarding the elastomeric bumpers.

184. Reference is made to Segmentally Erected Superstructure of the Special Provisions. It is our intent to develop the most effective construction sequence, this may not be the same as depicted on sheets 427-432 of the plans. If we proceed in this manner and propose a different sequence that we feel is more economically biable would this be considered a CRIP? Additionally, if the construction sequence is modified, will a charge be forthcoming for the review of the contractors erection engineering package reflecting his proposed erection sequence?

Please see Addendum #6

185. Please refer to the construction sequence package notes detailed on drawing number 432. Since the sequence shown is incomplete for construction how does the contractor know that in fact this particular sequence will work? Does Caltrans warrant that this particular sequence will not develop unacceptable stresses/strains that may be damaging to the integrity of the structure?

The design of the structure assumes a general construction sequence that is given in the construction documents. Such things as material properties, form traveler and support platform weights, and timing of the sequence are under the Contractor's control and will
affect the design. Also see responses to bidder inquiries Nos. 132 and 133.

186. When can we expect the "big addendum" with answers to bidder inquiries?

Possible Addendum and Addendum dates are not disclosed prior to the publishing of the Addendum. At that time Contractors holding bid packages will be notified.

187. Concerning the movable inspection platforms, the special provisions state that their are 14 platform sub-systems as shown in the plans. There are 16 spans, and span 16 has three interior boxes. The plans do not indicate where the 14 platforms are to be installed. Please provide a layout so that the platforms and rail can be accurately priced.

Please see Addendum #6.

188. Concerning the segmental lightweight concrete, the special provisions require that the concrete, immediately before placing, shall not exceed 20 degrees C. In order to obtain early strengths for stressing each segment, the contractor must insulate and or heat the segment to raise the concrete temperature to obtain the necessary early strength. Caltrans will pay for the contractor to cool the concrete before placing and then pay to heat or insulate the concrete immediately after placing. Please consider eliminating the specification requirement for the 20 degrees maximum temperature.

Please see addendum No 6.

189. Pay item #74, Seal Course Concrete is shown on Sheet 126 on the backfill section of Pier 5. All of the other excavation and backfill items listed are both pay items and are described in the contract specifications. We can find no reference in either the Special Provisions, or in the Standard Specifications describing the characteristics of "Seal Course Concrete". We ask that you define the material designated by that name.

Section 90-1.01 , "Description" of the Standard Specifications provides a minimum cement content for seal course concrete. Section 51-1.10 , "Concrete Deposited Under Water" provides additional information.

190. Regarding Tubular Hand Railing, plans show railings placed at each call box on both sides of the bridge. The elevation plans on Sheet 137 of 557 are consistent with this except at Station BM 23+10, where it does not show railings at this call box. Please clarify.

Call boxes are located on the barriers at Stations 23+10 NB Line and 22+95 NW Line in this area shown on Project Plan Sheets 72 and 131. The tubular handrailing is required at all call box locations, typical.

191. Regarding Tubular Hand Railing: How are these handrails quantified? Are they posted on both sides of the bridge or only the left side? Please clarify.

As shown in the Engineer's estimate, payment for item 139, tubular handrailing (modified), is by the linear meter. Project Plan Sheet 424 details the required length at each call box location.

192. The temperature specifications of 20* C maximum is similar to other lightweight bridge projects. This value is achievable; however, the use of liquid nitrogen may be required. Can this temperature requirement be relaxed if it can be shown that performance criteria are attained?

Please see Addendum #6.

193. There are various configurations of section geometry and placement procedures that will require different properties of the concrete. Concrete strength may be different (at early ages) for various sections to accommodate contractor construction sequences. It is neither realistic nor prudent to assume a "one size fits all" is appropriate for the lightweight concrete mixes.

Please see Addendum #6.

194. The requirement for a fixed quantity of air entrainment in the environment of the Benicia Martinez Bridge does not have any technical merit. Freeze-thaw and permeability should not be durability issues for this project. The usual rule for strength loss due to air (entrapped or entrained) is from 4 ? 7% strength reduction for each 1% air added. With the compressive strengths required to meet the modulus of elasticity requirements in this specification, high air content may preclude meeting them. ACI 216.2 table 3.2.2.3(a) infers that air entrainment should not be used for 6000 psi concrete. ACI 211.4R 3.1.5 (High Strength Concrete) states that "Air entraining admixtures are seldom used…when there are no freeze-thaw concerns". This ACI section further states "If entrained air is required…it will reduce significantly the compressive strength of the concrete". Entrained air, if not required for unit weight, is a control issue that will needlessly cause major control problems. Should the contractor desire air to enhance workability, it should be allowed ? not required. None of the concrete tested in the design phase of the project that met MOE requirements had entrained air.

Please see Addendum #6.

195. Are the MOE samples 102mm x 203mm or 150 mm x 300mm? Have there been any tests made to date that meet both air requirements and specified MOE? What compressive strength is necessary to make the MOE requirements?

Please see Addendum #6.

196. Tests on cylinders accompanying the creep tests at CTL show shrinkage of less than 0.05% at 180 days. ASTM C-157 tests on concrete used in these creep tests utilizing materials anticipated for this project did not meet the 0.05% in 28 days of
drying ? much less the 180 days,

The ASTM C157 prism shrinkage requirements are achievable with the proper mix design.

197. This requirement is somewhat ambiguous in that when referring to lightweight aggregate, "dry" can have several meanings. Does the specification mean "oven dry", "surface dry", or some other moisture state? Although the requirement for high-density lightweight to produce high MOE results is well documented, why is dry unit weight a specification requirement?

Please see Addendum #6.

198. There is no doubt that the saturation of lightweight aggregate will be required to produce pumpable concrete. Different lightweights have different saturation values that can be less than 10% to as much as 38%. Using the values in this specification, the lowest absorption lightweight will require the maximum saturation period while it is possible that partially saturated, high absorption lightweight would meet specification requirements for shortened saturation times.

Please see Addendum #4

199. This limit on the upper cementitious content does not mean that required strength and MOE cannot be met. What the limits mean is that a mix with a water/cementitious ratio low enough to achieve strength will be severely water starved. ACI 211.4 (proportioning high strength concrete) recommends that workable high strength concrete will have a "water slump" of 1" ? 2". At the very low water to cement ratio required to meet modulus of elasticity, maximum specified cement will dictate mixes with 5 ? 8 gallons of water less than 1" slump. We have never achieved strength and MOE values at the maximum specified cementitious content. Our testing shows that strength levels in excess of 62 MPa will be required to meet the MOE requirements.

Please see Addendum #4

200. It is a contractor responsibility to transport and place the concrete. While I agree with recommendations for using 5" steel line without reducers, I can’t understand why it should be a specification requirement.

Please see Addendum #6.

201. The values specified for air dry unit mass are reasonable and achievable. The time period for the results and assessment of penalty is much too long. A lot of concrete can be in place before rejection levels are detected.

The Special Provisions already have a criteria for the fresh unit mass, see 10-1.45, subsection "Lightweight Concrete," paragraph number 9. Final acceptance and any imposed penalties will remain based on the equilibrium density as specified. It is recommended that the Contractor develop a correlation between fresh unit mass and equilibrium density for his selected mix(es) prior to placing lightweight concrete in the structure to avoid penalties and or rejections of lightweight concrete.

202. What is the correct number of workdays for the completion of this project? Is it a maximum of 1100 or 1200? Addenda number 4 on the last page of the addendum ? page 11A states not to exceed 1100 days. This matches the quantity for Bid Item 8 on the bid form but does not match the 1200 listed in the A+B Bidding Special Notice of the proposal section. 1200 days was tight and now with the additional scope of work being added for the piling, 1100 days would be getting unreasonable.

Please see Addendum #5

203. The following relate to the addition of scope covering the over ream and fill requirements:
a. This new section indicates that the contractor is responsible for the design and determination of the height of reaming increments and not to exceed 10 meter in height. All costs associated with any failure due to cave-ins or other problems will be to the contractor’s account ? is this correct?
b. Why and how has the state determined 10 meters is the maximum length?
c. The new specifications state that if the contractor is directed by the Engineer to use the over ream and fill method at other locations other than at Piers 4, 10, 13, 14 and Load Test Pile that the unit prices for bid items 175 and 176 will be used to pay the contractor. These unit prices would not cover extended overhead and no mention is made of any time extension. How is the contractor going to be paid for this overhead exposure and the increase in working days?
d. Since this is an A + B proposal, how is the contractor’s exposure to the $35,000 per day (liquidated damages) covered if additional over reaming and fill locations are directed by the Engineer?
e. Are the possible additional over reaming and fill locations only at Piers 5, 6, 16 and 17? If we were to encounter a problem at another location during actual construction how would this be handled with regard to payment? Would this be handled as a differing site condition?

203a. The diameter of the over ream and the required length less than or equal to 10 meters is to be determined by the Contractor, as necessary to prevent caving.

203b. The 10 meter length was the average fill length successfully used on the Benicia Retrofit project.

203c. See Section 10-1.15 Progress Schedule ( Critical Path) subsection "Schedule Time Extension Requests" and Section 10-1.03 "Overhead" for time extensions due to contract change orders.

203d. Liquidated Damages would not apply to delays to the critical path caused by the Engineer's ordering of additional over reaming and filling.

203e. Additional over ream and fill may be requested at any other pier on the project. When ordered by the Engineer, additional over ream and fill will be paid for in accordance with the Special Provisions.

204. With regards to the contractor providing the state access to piers 6, 16 and 17 for geotechnical test boring; does the contractor need to also provide a cofferdam at each of these piers in addition to the access (environmental restriction in shallow water)?

The installation of cofferdams is not necessary for the State's additional test borings. Please see Addendum #7.

205. If we need to provide the state access with or without cofferdams we need to know the following to see if this can be done by the October 31,2001 cut ?off date for the first season :
a.   What are the anticipated dates for Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed for the contract?
b.   What submittal requirements are necessary to begin any work such as temporary access (trestles and cofferdams)?
c.   Will Caltrans’s review process time (3 weeks) on these early critical submittals be the same as with all other submittals or will it be shortened?

Please see Addendum #7.

206. Is it not correct that the limitation on dredged material is for the allowable amount of aquatic disposal (16,000cubic yards) and not for the total amount dredged? Any excess material over 16,000 cubic yards needs to be disposed of upland. If this is the case then why would the contractor be required to stop dredging operation if he determines that he is going to overrun the 16,000 cubic yards as stated in addendum #4 on page 4 - 1st paragraph?

Please see Addendum #6.

207. Page 188 of the special provisions third paragraph from the bottom states that installation of a pipe cooling system may not be required after the first installation if the acceptance criteria is met. Second paragraph from the bottom states that a cooling system is required for minimal cooling capacity. Which paragraph is correct?

Both paragraphs are correct. The Contractor's design calculations may indicate that a cooling system is not required (Condition A) but the special provisions still require a minimal cooling system to be installed for the first of each typical placements (2nd paragraph from the bottom). If the Contractor's calculations indicate a cooling system is required (Condition B), it needs to be installed and operational as specified.

208. The last paragraph on page 188 states that one can not use a combination of embedded pipe cooling and a concrete lift system. How does this effect the pier column construction, which will be done in concrete lifts? Can we still use embedded pipe cooling?

Answer pending

209. Addendum #4 revised various drawings. Please provide a description of the changes made on the following drawings: 5, 169, 213, 219, 220, 225, 232, 266, 270, 286 and 287. We are unable to find any changes.

Assume that the question refers to the Bridge Sheet numbering not Project Plan sheet numbering.

Sheet 5 "(Slag and Cinder)" added to Pier 5 "Limits Diagram".

Sheet 169 Dimensions added from deck level to center line anchorage,two locations, at upper left anchorage.

Sheet 213 In "Longitudinal Elevation," dimensions to anchorages revised, in "Section D-D" the pier tendons paths were revised.

Sheet 219 In "Longitudinal Elevation," dimensions to anchorages revised, in "Section D-D" the pier tendons paths were revised.

Sheet 220 In "Longitudinal Section" the diaphragm tendon locations were revised.

Sheet 225 In "Longitudinal Section" the diaphragm tendon locations were revised.

Sheet 232 In "Longitudinal Elevation," dimensions to anchorages revised, in "Section D-D" the pier tendons paths were revised.

Sheet 266 Section D-D notes were deleted.

Sheet 270 Rightmost dimensions revised in "Section B-B" and "Section at Distance Greater..."

Sheet 286 Multiple changes in "Section A-A," "Section B-B" and "Plan."

Sheet 287 Minor changes to "Section C-C," "Section D-D" and "Section E-E."

210. The answer to question 100 states that we need to include the results of the assessment with our bid. Where in the submittal do you want that included - pricing section or the questionnaire section?

Answer pending

211. We have employed a consultant to review the mass concrete cooling specifications (Construction Technology Laboratories) and have reached the following conclusion concerning the piling concrete: It is impossible to meet the specifications as it relates to the temperature reduction of 0.6 degree centigrade. If you could get there it would take upwards to 40 plus days per location. Cooling of the concrete in order to meet this would require the concrete temperature to be upwards to 30 degree Fahrenheit below ambient which depending on the time of year is not possible. Please review this situation and consider removing the piling concrete from the definition of mass concrete for cooling purposes.

The piling concrete will remain in the definition of mass concrete. Please note that the specification reads "In general, ……cooling shall……..not exceed 0.6C per day." The cooling rate shown in the specifications is based on preventing internal thermal cracking due to cooling pipes where the Contractor elects to not evenly distribute the cooling pipes throughout the mass concrete (in accordance with the assumptions of ACI 207).

212. Reference: -Special Provision Section 4, paragraph 4 on page 19, -Plan Sheets 307 and 309 of 433. Inquiry: Section 4 paragraph 4 states that "The work consisting of constructing Frame 1 shall be diligently prosecuted to completion before the expiration of 900 working days ... " Please confirm that this requirement will have been satisfied upon completion of upper hinge A and B (step 8 of the construction sequence shown of sheet 307/433). If it is required that all closures in Frame 1 be complete by 900 working days, please be advised that this does not occur until step 34 on sheet 309/433, when span 13 is closed. Since span 13 is one of the final steps in the bridge's completion sequence, virtually the entire bridge would have to be complete by 900 calendar days.

Completion of the Frame means completion such that the load from the hinge tiedown or the long-span hinge load may be safely added to the hinge in Span 17.

213. Addendum #4 changed the thickness of the grade beam on Section 1, Sheet 488, from 686 mm to 749 mm. The addendum does not indicate any changes to the slab or footing dimensions to make up the add of 63 mm. Please clarify dimension changes.

Please see Addendum #6.

214. See Drawing p. 423 of 557. Section D-D calls for Externally mounted channel strut with cast-in-place insert and layout see "Road Plans". A check of the index sheets on drawings 1, 123, and 124 of 557 failed to locate drawings titled "Road Plans". Please provide more information on these externally mounted channel struts (size, length, number of inserts each, etc.)

"See Road Plans" is a term that refers to the non-bridge portion of the plans, specifically , sheets 1-121. With regard to the specific question, the Road Plans contain the electrical drawings on sheets 71-121, the information regarding the channel struts can be found therein.

215. Please see Addendum #4 Drawings 387, 391, 407, and 408 of 557. After close review, we have failed to locate the addendum changes to the above listed drawings. Please provide a short general statement about what was changed on each drawing. Such information would help to focus in on changes in a timely manner.

Sheet 387: Section D-D notes were deleted. Sheet 391: Rightmost dimensions revised in "Section B-B" and "Section at Distance Greater…". Sheet 407: Multiple changes in "Section A-A", "Section B-B", and "Plan". Sheet 408: Minor changes to "Section C-C", "Section D-D", and "Section E-E".

216 A. If we propse to case the the rock socket all the way to the bottom are we looking at the project contrary to the current specifications. B. If the answer to question A is yes, do we need to write a CRIP after the NTP, get it approved by yourselves, and install the this pile in the area of pier 19 in Benicia and also install another pile at bents 9 and 10 before commencing with production work. C. If the answer to questions A & B leads one to the position that the reverse circulation drilling possess is the only method receptive to Caltrans then we would like to request both a 30 day extension to the bid period and a 200 day extension to the contract time because both of the current time periods are not attainable.

Part A. Casing the rock socket with temporary steel casing is already allowed by the standard specifications in Section 49-4.03 and also noted in the special provisions. Permanent casing within the rock socket is not allowed due to the skin friction design of the rock sockets.
Part B. The order of work will remain as specified, whether or not the Contractor chooses to use temporary casing for the rock socket construction.
Part C. Use of the reverse circulation method is not a requirement of the special provisions, though it was used successfully to construct and to retrofit the existing Benicia Martinez Bridge and Overhead.

Revised as of August 13, 2001:

Part A. Please see Addendum #6. Casing the rock socket at non-over ream and fill locations with temporary steel casing is allowed by the standard specifications in Section 49-4.03 and also noted in the special provisions. Temporary casing in the rock sockets at over ream and fill locations is considered an alternative method and must be included in an approved CRIP before it can be used. Permanent casing within the rock sockets is not allowed due to the skin friction design of the rock sockets.

Part B. Please See Addendum #6. An alternate method proposed in a CRIP for use at locations specified to use the over ream and fill method within the rock sockets, does require an additional Osterburg test at Pier 10.

217. If we can only work in the shallow water from 1 July to 31 October and the bid is 17 July or later, does one suppose that Caltrans thinks the concrete for water work prior to fall 2002 would be mixed on a barge or no water work will be done at all.

How concrete is brought to the site to construct the bridge is the Contractor's means and methods.

218. See Drawing 376 of 557. Please identify the drawing for the called out "Longitudinal Section L-L".

Like "Longitudinal Section A-A" and "Longitudinal Section C-C" on sheets 371 and 372, there is no section cut for "Longitudinal Section L-L" simply shows an elevation of the hinge face such that the elastomeric bumpers required at the hinge can be detailed.

219. BLANK

220. In Addendum #4, the quantity of Roadway Excavation shown on Sheet 66 of 557 is changed to 13168 M3, but no revised cross section was issued with the Addendum. A) Is the Roadway Excavation Quantity based on the Cross Section that we received from Blue Print Services? B) Will a revised Cross Section for this area be issued? C) Under what Item does the 9857 M3 of Embankment shown on Sheet 66 of 557 get paid?

Answer pending

221. There are approx. 150 serious questions, many over 60 days old, in the Caltrans website Contractors Inquiry Responses that are not answered. Many of these questions have serious schedule and cost implications. Even if all these questions were answered, there is now insufficient time to anaylze and estimate these issues before the current July 17th bid date. The project is extremely complex and requires additional time with consultants, Joint Venture Partners and meetings in addition to the estimating effort.

Please See Addendum #5

222. If the job were to be awarded in August, there is a very significant amount of work to be done including trestles, pile fabrication, platforms and additional addendum 4 testing, and cofferdams by the October 31, 2001 time frame. It is not realistic to expect all the required submittals and work to be accomplished in this time frame. Because of this, the project should have a schedule of 1200 days after March 2002.

Please See Addendum #5

223. Is financing secured for this project?

Please see Addendum #7.

224. Based on the specifications, the 900 day schedule milestone does not appear to be achievable. Reference: -Special Provision Section 4, paragraph 4 on page 19, -Plan Sheets 307 and 309 of 433. Inquiry: Section 4 paragraph 4 states that "The work consisting of constructing Frame 1 shall be diligently prosecuted to completion before the expiration of 900 working days ... " Please confirm that this requirement will have been satisfied upon completion of upper hinge A and B (step 8 of the construction sequence shown of sheet 307/433). If it is required that all closures in Frame 1 be complete by 900 working days, please be advised that this does not occur until step 34 on sheet 309/433, when span 13 is closed. Since span 13 is one of the final steps in the bridge's completion sequence, virtually the entire bridge would have to be complete by 900 calendar days.

Answer pending

225. The addendum 4 added the overream and fill work, which may add as much as 200 days to the schedule. We feel the 1100 day schedule is not achievable.

Please See Addendum #5

226. There is an inordinate amount of risk placed on the contractor with the addendum 4 overream and fill work as described in previous question #203 on the Contractors Inquiry Responses website.

Answer pending

227. We feel that it would be to Caltans best interest to postpone this bid for approximately 6 months to give time to properly determine answers to Contractors questions and time for proper analysis and proper estimating for the best competitive bids for Caltrans. This is a signature project and Caltrans should have the best price possible from the Heavy Construction marketplace.

Please See Addendum #5

228. We are requesting that Caltrans consider postponing the bid date for this project. The reasons for this request are:

- There have been to date 220 questions asked and only 96 answered. Some of these answers will have a large impact on the formation of the bid and the schedule.
- Addendum #4 cut the overall schedule but more importantly added work that needs to be completed within the 900 and the 1100-day milestones.
- In order to meet the present milestones it is our opinion that the amount of activities required at any one time to complete the work is unreasonable (both in manpower and equipment requirements).
- Additionally the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Permit allows for only 82,900 SF of barge surface on the water. There will be an overrun in the equipment required to support this project in order to meet the milestones.
- The unknown amount of work required at future locations for over reaming is a concern as there is no provision for additional time. In reviewing the core samples that were previously taken it would appear that additional locations would be added.
- The addition of the over reaming has prompted some of the drilling subcontractors to decide not to submit a quote due to the unknown risk and equipment requirements.
-The uncertainty of the time that will be available to the contractor for installation of the temporary trestles and cofferdams prior to October 31, 2001.
- The cooling of the mass concrete requirements (if possible) adds time to the schedule that doesn’t appear to have been taken into account for the two milestones dates.
- Grouting requirements on the cantilever tendons cause for lost time in the cycle. This along with other issues will require the need for more sets of travelers than the five called for in the specifications in order to meet the milestone dates.

Please see Addendum #6 regarding the bid date for this project.

229. We do not understand the basic functional requirements of the Navigational flashing beacons (main channel)-red and green. Could you please provide a detailed narrative statement describing the desired operation of this system? Please include facets such as: Do the lights need to flash in unison between the 2 bridges? What monitoring and control functions are required? Is there any interaction between the red and green lights, e.g. does the red go on when the lift span (Railroad bridge) is down and the green go on when it is raised? How does the lift span connection (flashing beacon control transmitter system, drawing E-44) relate to the Navigational flashing beacons.

Refer to United States Coast Guard permit.

230. The last addendum received (Add. #4), indicates that the Engineer is directing the Contractor to use the same drilling system adapted at the Carquinez Bridge project. Our study of this project has identified that reverse circulation drilling may increase the risk of caving the foundation material due to the following:
- Limited drilling tools, only one drilling tool can be used to excavate the different lenses of foundation material.
- Restricted access to stabilize caving soils. The time required (exposure) to remove drill tools and backfill the pile is significantly increased as compared to conventional methods
- Increased caving potential, caused by excessive circulation of drill fluid through the shaft to keep material in suspension for removal by the reverse circulation method.
A. We request the Engineer to clearly specify if the Reverse Circulation drilling method is the only method allowed for use on this project or whether means and methods to install the piles are the Contractor’s responsibility?
B. It is our intent to completely avoid the use of reverse circulation drilling and install the contract load test pile and production piles using a different drilling system. Please confirm that this approach is acceptable?

230A. The reverse circulation method is not specified in the special provisions.

230B. Provided the Contractor's drilling system can satisfactorily install the piling in accordance with the plans and special provisions, any drilling system may be used.

231. In regards to Note #4, Sheet 176B (Add. # 4): "The load test pile construction shall be identical in all respects to the production piles including methods of installation, testing, and all materials…" and the Over Ream and Fill section of Addendum # 4, which states: "At the pier locations shown in the following table…" [Pier 4, Piers 10, 13, 14 and the Load Test Pile] "…construction of each cast-in-drilled-hole piling below the permanent steel casings… shall be preceded by over reaming of the hole, filling of the hole with fiber reinforced concrete and subsequent redrilling …". Since we do not anticipate over reaming production piles, why are we instructed to over ream any pile? If the requirements of the Addendum # 4 Specifications confirm the Contractor’s requirement to over ream, we have the following questions: A. Is it the Engineer’s intention to have all production piles "identical in all respects" to the Load Test Pile, including fiber reinforced concrete? B. If Over Ream and Fill is not required on all piles, will the Contractor be required to install a second test pile shaft to test the side shear and end bearing of a pile that has not been Over Reamed and Filled?

231A. Please see Addendum #6.
231B. Please see Addendum #6.

232. The second to last paragraph of the Over Ream and Fill section of Addendum # 4, states: Where the Contractor is directed by the Engineer to use the over ream and fill method at locations not listed in the above table, the work will be paid at the unit price bid for over ream and fill of the various sizes shown in the Engineer’s Estimate." A. Is it the Engineer’s intent to request that the remaining piles, not listed in the table, are to be Over Reamed and Filled or only when required to stabilize caving soils? B. At the completion of drilling, if the sonic logging of any pile not listed in the Over Ream and Fill table indicates localized cave-ins in excess of 1.5 x the pile diameter, will the contractor be compensated to backfill the pile up to and including the localized cave-in and redrill? C. Will the Contractor be granted a time extension to Over Ream and Fill piles not indicated in the table?

232A. No, it is not the intent of the State to have all the piles over reamed and filled, however, additional over ream and fill may be ordered by the Engineer as specified in the special provisions.

232B. No, only locations where the over ream and fill method is specified or ordered by the Engineer will receive payment for filling of the piles as part of the over ream and fill pay item. Piles which are not specified or ordered by the Engineer to have over reaming and filling, but which do not satisfy the 1.5 x pile diameter criteria, will have to be filled and redrilled as part of the Contractor's bid price for the various sizes of CIDH piling.

232C. See Section 10-1.15 Progress Schedule (Critical Path) subsection "Schedule Time Extension Requests" and Section 10-1.03 "Overhead" for time extensions due to contract change orders.

233. For CIDH shafts that are required to follow the Over Ream and Fill specification, is it necessary to over ream the last section (<10m)? Or, can you drill out the second to last section of back-filled fiber mesh concrete to 2.2m and continue drilling the last section at 2.2m and place the reinforcement and the 25 MPa CIDH shaft concrete?

Yes, that is what is specified. No, the bottom section must be over reamed and filled, as specified.

234. According to Contract Drawing 58/433 Pile Details No. 4 (Add. #4). The length of the Contractor designed driving shoe is in addition to the length required to reach the "bottom of permanent casing". A. Are we to assume that the bottom of permanent steel casing is the "specified tip elevation" of the permanent steel casing on the Foundation Data Dwg.? B. Drawing 55/433 Note # 4 (Add #4) states that "in the event that the rock elevation differs from that assumed during the design, the embedment of the permanent steel casings into rock required by the design shall be maintained. - Is the length of the driving shoe considered when measuring for embedment into rock? - What is the minimum length of embedment into rock assumed in the design?

234A. Yes, see special provision section 10-1.41, "Piling", subsection "General".

234B. No. The minimum embedment into rock varies, depending on the pier location.

235. Ref: Addendum 4 as it relates to CIDH piles and load testing: A. If the load test pile is to be built using all the methods of the production piles then it will have been over reamed and filled. How will this be an accurate test for production piles that have not been over reamed and filled? Don't you need to add a second test pile that has not been over reamed and filled? B. It is our opinion that reverse circulation drilling will increase the risk of caving in soft material. The excessive circulation of the drilling fluids required to keep the excavated materials in suspension and the suction required to lift them is in effect a mild hydro blast and dredge operation. As written you have directed a method that may cause or magnify caving problems and yet you also require the contractor to be responsible for performance. Please specify a method or a performance but not both. C. At the completion of drilling, if the sonic logging of a pile not listed in the over ream and fill table indicates a localized cave-in in excess of 1.5 times the diameter, will the pay measurement for over ream and fill be for just the local area needing the over ream and fill? The actual work will require back filling of the pile up to the cave-in and redrilling the same after the over ream and fill. What type of material will the contractor be allowed or required to use for this temporary backfill? D. We applaud bid items 175 & 176 to pay for over ream and fill. They give the contractor some relief for the unknown quantity of caving soils. However , as stated in queston 203, the specification is written without a mechanism to extend time and pay additional overhead. Therefore the direct cost to do this unknown quantity of over ream and fill when on the critical path must include the costs of Time Related Overhead and Liquidated Damages. Say $100,000 / day. Each lift of over ream and fill will take 2 days to pour and cure. Perhaps more since the fiber reinforced concrete by specification must be mass concrete. Assuming 2 days and a 10 meter length the cost will be $20,000 / meter before lick of work is done. Double if the engineer only orders a 5 meter length of over ream and another 1/3 if it takes 2 days to gain the required strength. Is it your intention that the fiber reinforced concrete be mass concrete? What is the minimum length of over ream the engineer will order? Their effect on cost for items 175 & 176 is tremendous.

235A. Please see Addendum #6.

235B. Please see Addendum #6. The reverse circulation method is not specified in the special provisions.

235C. Please see Response to # 232B.

235D. See Section 10-1.15 Progress Schedule (Critical Path) subsection "Schedule Time Extension Requests" and Section 10-1.03 "Overhead" for time extensions due to contract change orders. Fill concrete used as part of the over ream and fill bid item or where required to fill CIDH's that exceed 1.5 x diameter, will not be considered mass concrete. The minimum length of over ream and fill to be ordered by the Engineer is unknown at this time.

236. Ref: Your response to question 71 regarding air content testing. California test 504 states that samples will be taken in accordance with the applicable provisions of ASTM C 172. It says in note 2 of paragraph 5.2 that ""Sampling should normally be performed as the concrete is delivered from the mixer to the conveying vehicle used to transport the concrete to the forms; however, specifications may require other points of sampling such as the discharge point of a concrete pump."" This requirement needs to be added to the job specification if you want the samples to be taken at the end of
the concrete line as you stated in you response to question 71.

Please see Addendum #6. The minimum air content requirement has been deleted.

237. Threaded couplers required for future widening on west overhang: DWG S214, S215, (girder layout) shown future widening is from north side
of intermediate diaphragm (at 'nb' 23+22.787) to segment 5 n of pier 15. (Rcvd 6/14/01) DWG S359, S361 (Transverse Rib) asked for threaded couplers from intermediate diaphragm (at nb 23+22.787) to segment 9N of pier 15. Dwg S394, S397 (girder reinforcing) asked for threaded couplers from 'nb 23+64.063) (south side of P16 diaphragm) to segment 9n of pier 15. Would couplers be required for top deck slab & transverse ribs from intermediate diaphragm @ ""nb' 23+22.787) from seg. 5n of pier 15?

No. The future widening includes a very slight taper that begins at "BM" 24 + 35.601 (within Seg. 5N of Pier 15). However, the mechanical splicing of the deck and rib reinforcement is not necessary until Segment 9N of Pier 15 (taper too slight to warrant coupled reinforcement). Use the details and notes shown on sheets S359, S361, S394 and S397, as written.

238. DWG S400 Special detail (clearance requirements for duct) notes: work this sheet w/ "typical sections P4 & S3" (S212) and "typical section S2 and S1 (S213) sheets S212, S213, are typical sections from hinge "e" to EB do the #16 PIN ties bend at each stirrup legs... only req'd from hinge "e" at "BM" 42+39.794 to EB @ BM 45+30+.094) are the #16 Uties w/ hooks at 600 max... on outside of curve only req'd from hinge 'E' at 'BM' 42=39.794) to EC @ 43+30.396) (see structure plan dwg s134)(Rcvd 6/14/01)

The drawings are correct, please bid it as shown.

239. DWG S329 Pier table @ pier 15,14,13 Section E-ES329 #19 Pin ties At 300 vert spacing should be at 200 vert spacing (HOR bars at 200 all other pier tables are at 200. (Rcvd 6/14/01)"

Please see Addendum #7.

240. DWG. S167 Section AA Precast footing details Is the weight of the #32 T-headed horizontal bars and the #57 T-headed vertical originating from the precast shell to be paid for the preast item or the main epoxy reinforcing bid item 98? (Rcvd 6/14/01)

Please see Addendum #6 and "Measurement and Payment" of Section 10-1.45, "Concrete Structures" of the special provisions.

241. We request that the Engineer review its position regarding the additional requirements outlined in Addendum #4 for the construction of CIDH concrete piles and allow the Contractor to have the flexibility to use the means and methods best suited to construct CIDH concrete piles in complex geological conditions expected.

Please see Addendum #6.

242. I am assuming that the reason for specifying only round or elliptical heads is for epoxy coating the welded head.The question being asked, is it the flat surface (top and bottom) of these heads that needs to be round or elliptical in shape, or is it the "edges" of these headed plates that need to be round or elliptical? Or is it both? If the heads are cut to a round or elliptical shape from "flat plate stock" there will still be edges along the circumference (top and bottom) that would not be suitable for epoxy coating. The minimum diameter, minimum plate thickness, methods for attaching plates to the reinforcing steel, and the acceptable steel types for these headed plates are all clearly defined by Caltrans in their standards and specification. However, if the round or elliptical shape for the epoxy coated plates is meant to address the edges of these plates and not simply the surface area. Then the manufactures of headed plates may need to be given further guidelines defining the acceptable degree of minimum tapering or rounding required to allow adequate coating of the edges of the headed plates.

Please see Addendum #6.

243. Please be advised that in accordance with Section 10-1.11 we request groundwater smples referred to.

244. I am completing a strand quantity takeoff for the new Benicia Martinez bridge. Where can I find a dimension in the drawing for the distance from footing to pier.

Overall footing dimensions are shown on the "Footing Layout" sheets. Pier sections are shown on the "Pier Details" sheets.

245. SP pages 294 - 295, "Galvanized Rigid Steel Conduit, Threaded Couplings, and Elbows", "Polyvinyl Chloride Coated Galvanized Rigid Steel Conduit, hreaded Couplings, and Elbows", due these two sections apply to all Type 1, and Type 2 conduit used on this project? If not, what areas of work will the conduit be used in?

Answer pending

246. Sheet 413 of 557 "Barrier Detail" shows 75 DIA PVC duct two 45 DIA PVC ducts that will be in conflict with all of the 9A and 9M barrier pull boxes. What are the ducts for? How are the pull boxes to be installed? "Section B" shows 75 DIA (3'') duct in call box anchor bolt area. Is
this correct? Typically 1'' (27c) conduit is install for call boxes concert barrier mounted.

Answer pending

247. Reference: 10-1.80 Reinforced, Recycled Plastic (RRP) Lumber, Page 280. It is my understanding CalTrans recently revised their specifications for acceptable material under SPECIFICATION FOR PLASTIC LUMBER to include other types. The types now acceptable under the new specification are: (1) Rebar Reinforced Recycled (RRR), (2) Filament Reinforced Recycled (FRR), (3) Composite (CP). Will material within this new specification be acceptable for this project, considering the specifications for this project were probally written prior to the updated specs? I would like to ask for consideration in issueing an amendment to reflect the newer specifications. The FRR material is currently being used on the Bay Bridge fendering project.

The specifications will remain as they are written for the RRP.

248. Reference to 423 of 557: Just how many interior maintenance travelers are there? One per span or one which can be moved from span to span thru the pier table? Please clarify.

Please see response to bidder inquiry #128.

249. Reference the areas shown to be Environmentally Sensitive Areas on plan sheets 5,6 and 11 of 357. Plan sheet 6 clearly shows that portions of pier 17, to be constructed as a part of this contract, are within an ESA area. Reference the third paragraph of Special Provisions section 5-1.34, Environmental Work Restrictions, which states "All work in the waters of the Carquinez Strait less than 3 meters deep, as measured from the mean lower low water line, shall be limited to the period of July 1 through October 31. Work in a water surrounded area (where the water depth is less than 3m) that is fully contained within an earlier constructed cofferdam and is accessed via the Contractor's access trestle may be done during the restricted time period provided there is no disturbance whatsoever to the area outside the cofferdam." Reference the second paragraph of Special Provisions Section 10-1.33, Environmentally Sensitive Area (General), which states "Within the boundaries of an ESA, no project related activities shall take place. This specifically prohibits vehicle access, storage or transport of any materials, including hydrocarbon and lead contaminated material, or any other project related activities." This last referenced specification would seem to prohibit all construction in ESA areas, including but not limited to pier 17, related cofferdams and temporary trestles. It is assumed that this last referenced specification is not worded correctly and that the installation and removal of temporary trestle piling and cofferdam work related to the construction of pier 17 and the superstructure will be allowed during the period of July 1 through October 31. It is further assumed that the Contractor will be allowed to construct pier 17 and the superstructure throughout the calendar year providing activities which are not restricted to areas above the water or within a cofferdam are restricted to the period between July 1 and October 31 per the provisions of 5-1.34, Environmental Work Restrictions. Please provide clear direction if Caltrans' intent is different to what is assumed above.

Please see Addendum #6.

250. Reference the 2.2m Cast-In-Drilled-Hole Concrete Piling (Rock Socket) work. Additionally reference Contractor Inquiry number 216 and the response provided by Caltrans. Please answer the follow questions relating to the Cast-In-Drilled-Hole Concrete Piling (Rock Socket) and Over Ream and Fill (2.8 m Minimum Diameter) contract bid items.

Not a question. Reference for inquiries # 250A, 250B, 250C, 250D, below.

250A. Is the Over Ream and Fill work, bid items 175 and 176, added by Addendum No.4, included as what Caltrans sees as a necessary or prudent step in construction of the piling via reverse circulation method or is it added due to some requirement of pile friction in the completed pile?

The Over Ream and Fill work was added due to the State's concerns about slaking and caving of the rock sockets in certain areas, irrespective as to whether reverse circulation method is used or not. The over ream and fill method was not added due to a friction concern within the rock sockets.

250B. Temporary steel casing is already allowed by the Standard Specifications (reference Caltrans response to question 216). Should the Contractor elect to construct the rock sockets using temporary steel casings for the full length of the rock socket construction, then will Caltrans still require the construction of contract item 175, Over Ream and Fill (2.8m Minimum Diameter) for piles at piers 4, 10, 13, 14 and Load Test Pile, as shown in the table which is a part of Special Provision Section 10-1.41, Piling subsection Over Ream and Fill, which was added as a part of Addendum No. 4 ?

Please see Addendum #6 and the revised responses to 216A and 216B.

250C. Since casing of the rock socket with temporary steel casing is already allowed by the Standard Specifications and reverse circulation method is not a requirement of the Special Provisions (reference Caltrans response to question 216) , then if the Contractor elects to utilize temporary steel casing in order to construct the rock sockets, would the Contractor be required to submit and obtain approval of a CRIP (reference the last paragraph of Over Ream and Fill of the Special Provisions) in order to construct the rock sockets via a method utilizing temporary steel casings for the full length of the rock sockets?

No CRIP would be required for successful use of temporary casing as already allowed by the Standard Specifications at locations not specified to be constructed using the over ream and fill method. A CRIP is required for alternative methods at locations specified to be constructed using the over ream and fill method. Also see revised responses 216A and 216B.

250D. Similarly, should the Contractor elect to construct the subject rock sockets with the above described temporary steel casing method, already allowed by the Standard Specifications, then would it be necessary for the Contractor to Construct additional test pile and to "demonstrate by testing that the shear friction capacity of the rock socket, when using the Contractor's proposed method, is equal to or greater than that proposed in the design" as described in the last paragraph of Special Provision Subsection Over Ream and Fill?

See revised responses 216A and 216B.

251. SP page 322, Section 10-4.07 Telephone Service, requires ISDN phone service for seismic recorder cabinets. There will be no access to provide a phone line to this project until the other contracts that connect to this contract are completed. How is the phone line to be installed? Or will this section be deleted from this contract?

Answer pending

252.Would you please expedite the answer to Question No. 61 as it has a substantial impact on schedule sequences and duration.

Answer pending

253. Has funding been secured for this project?

Please see Addendum #7.

254. The epoxy-coating for this project is to meet ASTM A-934, Section 9.1.1 of the Epoxy Spec. reads "The coating thickness after curing shall be 7 to 12 mils [175 to 300um]. At no extra cost to Caltrans will the coating thickness of 7 to 16 mils on #19 and larger bar sizes of bar be allowed?
This was allowed on Contract 04-045014 San Mateo Bridge, the largest Caltrans epoxy-coated project to date.

No, the thicker coating will not be allowed on this project.

255A. Does Caltrans intend to comply with strict interpretation of ASTM 934 Section 9.1.5? This section reads as follows: "The thickness of the coating shall be measured on the body of a straight length of coated reinforcing steel bar between the deformations or ribs.'

QA sampling may include both straight and bent bar samples in accordance with Section 10.1 of ASTM A 934.

255B. If the answer is no, could you explain in your correspondence what inspection guidelines will be used on sections of bars that are not of 'straight length.' If Caltrans inspection procedures will supersede the ASTM standard requirements, it will be imperative for all potential bidders to clearly understand these rules in writing.

The Engineer will continue to implement the procedures outlined in the Standard Specifications and the Standard Special Provisions,
ASTM A 934 and G 12 Specifications. The Caltrans developed document "Supplemental Guidelines to ASTM A 934" will also be used to assist inspectors in evaluating epoxy coated rebar for this project.

256. Please reference layers BR1, BR4, BR7 & TR1 in the Footing's, your diagram shows a continuous bar, may we splice these bars and if so is it required to be a mechanical coupler?

Bars in the layers in question may be spliced. A mechanical coupler is not required except at locations where lap splices are not allowed (#43, #57). Epoxy coated reinforcement may not be spliced by welding.

257. When I looked at the Contractor's Inquiry Responses dated 18 July 2001, I noticed many responses telling the reader to see Addendum #5 such as # 65,66,69,88, 98, 108,128,131,145, 173, I did, but there were no drawings as part of addendum 5 so I could not locate the answers. Is Addendum six forth coming.

Please see Addendum #6.

258. In as much as the piling are such a large portion of this project, and pier two at Carquinez is being done by reverse circulation drilling and the drill,ream and fill process, can you tell me where I can obtain a copy of the installation logs of those piles to date. Also on the retrofit of the Benicia Bridge there were some large diameter piles installed on two of the piers, where may i obtain those installation logs.

Drilling logs for the new Carquinez Bridge are not part of the Materials Handouts for this project. Drilling logs for the Benicia Martinez Retrofit are included in the Materials Handouts for this project.

259. Is my interpretation of the specifications correct--The CIDH piles or rock sockets at piers 4,10,13,14 and the test pile located near pier 19 will be installed using the over ream and fill method. The other CIDH and rock sockets will be installed using a method that develops an acceptable pile to the depths noted on the drawings. The other method will install a non production test pile at Pier 10 as stated in the last paragraph of the section entitled Over Ream and Fill.

No, the interpretation is not correct. Please see Addenda and special provisions.

260. Ref: Specification section 10-1.11 regarding ground water samples. We requested ground water samples by letter on July 2, 01 and were told by Charles Smith over the phone that if we were planning to use the Rhodia treatment facility we did not need to obtain samples, do bench scale assessments and submit them with our bid. Is this true? We do not read the Contractor's Inquiry Responses and missed the sample hand out on July 11.

Please see Addendum #6.

261. Ref: Light Weight Concrete: At present, the performance and method specifications are in direct conflict. A number of questions regarding the lightweight concrete specifications that were asked nearly two months ago remain unanswered. In particular, questions 188, 192, 194, and 196 deal with the mix temperature, air content and drying shrinkage. Limiting the mix temperature to 20 C will simply cost taxpayers more money to cool a mix that will then be kept warm to achieve early strengths. The current air entraining and shrinkage specifications prevent meeting the creep and modulus of elasticity requirements at all.
At present, trial batching of lightweight concrete for this project has yielded an unworkable mixture that will meet strength, MOE, and creep criteria, but not with air entraining or the prescribed drying shrinkage test. The concrete supplier with the most information about this specification will not quote the project as it is specified today. The lightweight specifications should be performance based, or method based, not both. In addition, there is no longer enough time before the August 21st bid date to test any specification changes with trial batches therfore please give us a mix design that meets specifications and is workable.

Please see Addendum # 6 for several changes to the Lightweight Concrete specifications made to address some of these concerns.

262. Is there a date det for Addenda #6 to be released?

Please see Addendum #6.

263. Our estimators have the following question in regards to the above project: In section 10-1.14 - construction surveying, the contractor is requested to use a GPS system for their survey operation. What is the reason for this requirement? RTK-GPS used around steel structures like pile driving equipment, crane barges and steel templates increases the risk of errors caused my so called 'multipad'.

RTK-GPS is not the only method specified or available for use by the contractors. RTK-GPS is specified due to its greater accuracy and efficiency and due to the problems with surveying over long distances with conventional surveying instruments. There is equipment available which includes multipath mitigation software to minimize surveying errors due to multipath.

264. Ref: Contract# 04-006034, Pile Details No. 4, Sheet 058 of 433 25mm x 25mm square bar is shown welded on 250mm centers 15 places on the interior of the top and 16 places on the bottom of the casing in Detail A and C. Are there any other acceptable configurations such as 13mm x 25mm bar welded on 125mm centers 30 places or 13mm x 50mm bar welded on 250mm centers 15 places that may be used?

Please bid the piling shear rings as shown on the plans.

265. A 12mm filet weld is required on both sides of the 25mm x 25mm bar. Can alternate weld details with the same weld throat area be used such as a bevel weld with a backup filet?

Please bid the piling shear rings as shown on the plans.

266. Special Provision 10-1.41 Piling (pg 172) Measurement and Payment states in paragraph 2 that price paid per meter of CIDH concrete piling shall include ...furnishing and placing concrete and reinforcement,... Paragraph 5 states Payment for cast-in-place concrete piling ...when diameter of cast-in-place concrete piling is shown on the plans as 600 mm or larger, reinforcement in the piling will be paid for by the kilogram as bar reinforcing steel (bridge). Please confirm that the reinforcing in
the 750, 2.2, 2.5, and 2.6 cast-in-drilled-hole concrete piling get paid as bar reinforcing steel (bridge).

The referenced paragraph is a modification to the Standard Specifications, the special provisions govern over the Standard Specifications, thus, paragraph 5 controls and payment of the piling bar reinforcing is separate from the piling pay items.

267. Addendum 4 (pg 7) last paragraph states ...subsequently redrilling through the fiber reinforced concrete will be measured and paid for by the linear meter as over ream and fill of the various sizes... (pg 8) 2nd paragraph states Full compensation for drilling through the fiber reinforced concrete placed as part of the over ream and fill method ...shall be considered as included in the contract unit price paid for 2.2 m Cast-in-Drilled-Hole Concrete Piling (Rock Socket) or... Please confirm that the subsequent redrilling through the fiber reinforced concrete pays as part of the Rock Socket and not the Over Ream item.

Please see Addendum #6.

268. Please let us know where we can get the result of water samples for Pier 5.
We are looking for metal results.

Please see Addendum #6.

269. In Addendum No. 6 pertaining to SECTION 10-1.51, "Joint Seal Assemblies (Movement Rating Exceeding 100mm)", is revised to determine the number of cells in the expansion joint by taking the total movement rating and dividing by 130 mm. Normally Caltrans permits up to 75 mm movement rating per cell (bay of neoprene gland). Does the Addendum No. 6 revision mean that the Joint Seal Assembly will move normally from 0 to 75 mm per cell and during a seismic event move up to 130mm per cell? If this is the meaning, are the neoprene glands expected to remain in the joint during and after the seismic event or are the neoprene glands permitted to pullout our tear as they open to 130 mm? If the 130mm movement rating is for strictly thermal movement, this creates 6" wide gaps between support rails that traffic must cross at full opening. This includes motorcycle traffic. Please clarify this addendum 6 change.

The Caltrans 75mm maximum opening under service conditions is still applicable and will be satisfied for the construction sequence shown on the plans if the number of glands is determined by dividing the movement rating by 130mm. The Addendum No 6 change simply reduces the movement rating. Damage to the joints is acceptable during a seismic event.

270. What will be the air draft under the bridge at Mean Higher High Water?

The vertical clearances (air drafts) from the tide line to the bottom of the structure vary in each span and will vary as the cantilevers are constructed. The plans contain adequate information to be able to calculate these clearances. Please also note the required minimum temporary vertical clearances in the shipping channel span and the alternate shipping channel span as shown in Section 5-1.18, "RELATIONS WITH U.S. COAST GUARD" of the special provisions and in the Coast Guard Permit.

271. What will be the ari draft under the bridge at Mean Lower Low Water?

See response to #270.

272. If the Contractor elects to use temporary steel casing for the rock socket portion of the 2.2 m diameter CIDH piles, is it OK to use 2.2m diameter steel casing, and slightly oversize the rock socket to allow the installation and removal of this casing?

Please see Addendum No 6, use of temporary casing within the rock sockets is only allowed at non-over ream and fill locations unless an alternative method is authorized in an approved CRIP. At locations not requiring the over ream and fill method, where temporary casing could be used, the diameter of the rock socket must be at least 2.2m, as shown on the plans, thus, a casing with an outer diameter larger than 2.2m must be used. As specified in 49-4.03, "DRILLED HOLES," of the Standard Specifications,
temporary casings must fit "tight" in the hole, for bidding purposes, a hole 50mm larger than the outer diameter of the casing will be considered a "tight" fit.

273A. The epoxy-coating for this project is to meet ASTM A-934, Section 9.1.1 of the Epoxy Spec. reads "The coating thickness after curing shall be 7 to 12 mils [175 to 300um]. At no extra cost to Caltrans will the coating thickness of 7 to 16 mils on #19 and larger bar sizes of bar be allowed? This was allowed on Contract 04-045014 San Mateo Bridge, the largest Caltrans epoxy-coated project to date. Does Caltrans intend to comply with strict interpretation of ASTM 934 Section 9.1.5? This section reads as follows: "The thickness of the coating shall be measured on the body of a straight length of coated reinforcing steel bar between the deformations or ribs.'

See #254A.

273B. If the answer is no, could you explain in your correspondence what inspection guidelines will be used on sections of bars that are not of 'straight length.' If Caltrans inspection procedures will supersede the ASTM standard requirements, it will be imperative for all potential bidders to clearly understand these rules in writing.

See #254B.

274a. Box and plate girders for hinge C & D (Plan sheet 251, 253, and 263 of 433). Plans and special provisions call for 102mm plate to ASTM A709 Grade 50 Spec's. The A709 Spec only goes to 100mm (4") thick plate. Please clarify.

The design intent where 102mm thick steel plate is called out was that four inch thick plate be used in accordance with ASTM Designation A709. Also see 8-1.01 SUBSTITUTION OF NON-METRIC MATERIALS AND PRODUCTS of the special provisions.

274b. Box and plate girders for hinge C & D (Plan sheet 251, 253, and 263 of 433). The Special Provisions (Page 265, Girder Fabrication) calls for girder outer flanges to be milled to a flatness of 1 mm in any direction and parrallel to one another within 1 mm. The plans do not indicate any machining allowance on the flange plate thickness. Are the plate thicknesses indicated on the plans the "After Machine" size or is there a "Minimum After Machine" thickness to allow for the machining?

Answer pending

275. Shear rings and stiffeners for 2.5 meter pile. The Special Provisions call for the 25 mm square bar shear rings and stiffeners to be same material as the piling. Are the same charpy V-notch test required for the square bars as the plate?

Answer pending

276. Referring to Sheet 176 of 557, of Addendum No. 6, showing pile details no. 1, show an older drawing depicting the pay lengths on the far left side of the page. If it is necessary to use these pay lengths, the quantities have to change. The previous revision had changed the pay lengths for casing and CIDH to be different with corresponding different quantities. Now they are showing the pay lengths to be the same, but still have the old "different" quantities. Please advise.

Answer pending

277. Sheet 71 of 557, E-1, General Note # 4, Is the hub required for pull boxes embedded in concrete? ie,# 9A pull box

No.

278. Sheet 71 of 557, E-1, General Note # 16, What is the meaning of "more than conduits" ?

Please bid according to plans and specifications.

279. Sheet 71 of 557, E-1,General Note # 18, How can the contractor bid the cost of a conflict in codes, when there are no guidelines for determining how the engineer's decision will be made?

Please bid according to plans and specifications.

280. Sheet 91 of 557, E-21, Section E-E, note 37 seems to be wrong. What is the correct note?

Answer pending

281. Sheet 76 of 557, E-6, "Terminate 2- 63c & 41c conduits in lighting pull box of other contract". Sheet 81 of 557, E-11, Terminate 130c & 2- 103c in high voltage pull box of other contract". Where are the pull boxes of the other contract located? What is the distance?

The pull boxes are next to the bridge abutment and they are within 6 meters.

282. There are no lane closure charts for Marina Vista Street. I need closure times for modifications to traffic signal system.

Answer pending

283. Refer to page 152 of the project specifications, under subtitle: NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING FOR PERMANENT STEEL CASING, further subtitle: Nondestructive Testing of Welds made at the Fabrication Facility, acceptance per Bay Bridge 1/17/01. Question: We are looking for a qualification related to Caltrans acceptable NDT for the statement in the first sentance of the first paragraph that reads as follows: "Twenty-five percent of each longitudinal weld made at a permanent fabrication facility shall receive NDT. One-hundred percent of all circumferential welds shall receive NDT."...(and later in the first sentence of the second paragraph) "Circumferential welds shall receive NDT by either radiographic, radioscopic, real time imaging systems, or ultrasonic methods that are in conformance with the requirements in AWS D1.1." We interpret this to allow less stringent methods of NDT, such as MT or PT for the 25% quantity of LN-FT of longitudinal welds in lieu of UT or what is specifically spelled out in the requirements above for the circumferential welds as 100% RT. We are asking for some guidance in our interpretation that allows for us to make methodology choices that could be of lesser cost impact to a fabricator than to relegate the more costly thorough inspection methodology, RT, specifically spelled out for the circumferential welds. Please advise.

Please make sure you are looking at the revised piling special provision issued in Addendum No 6. As required in the special provisions, the type of NDT testing for longitudinal welds shall be in accordance with the requirements of API 2B. API 2B requires radiographic NDT for longitudinal welds, MT and PT would not be acceptable NDT substitutes on this project.

284. Addendum #9 made the correction to put back the A + B portion of the contract, but eliminated the Mobilization bid item. Please add back the mobilization item or advise how mobilization is now to be bid.

Answer pending

285. Addendum 6 had defined what "completion" was in relation to the milestone for the hinges A & B. Addendum # 7 has reworded that paragraph and eliminated the definition (Section 4, 5th paragraph). Was it the intent of the agency that addendum # 7 eliminated the definition of "completion" that was established in addendum # 6?

Frame 1 shall be considered complete when the hinge tiedown force may be applied (or the long-span hinge load added).

286. The pay limits for the Rebar in the precast footers were adjusted in addendum #6 but there was no adjustment in the bid quantity for this item?

Answer pending

287. We have just received addendum #6, which includes 156 pages of specification revisions and 50 revised contract plans. None of the spec sheets or contract plans have any clouding or markings designating changes. It is an extremely time-consuming effort to compare every word and dimension on every revised spec and plan sheet against the original spec and plan sheets. Considering the volume of information, it is likely that some of the changes will not be identified. There were several questions to the owner on the last major addendum by contractors who could not find any changes on some of the revised plan sheets. This all creates uncertainty in our estimates that all changes have been priced. I would expect that there is a summary of changes that was developed to create this addendum. Please provide either a summary of these changes are reissue the addendum with changes denoted. Your help in this matter will assist all contractors in providing the most accurate and competitive estimates possible.

Thank you for your comment.

288. I am getting in touch with you on the suggestion of Mr. Robert Reis, Corrosion Specialist of Caltrans Materials Engineering and Testing Services. Our company, Boral markets Micron3, mineral admixture which could be used as an effective replacement for silica fume or Metakaolin mineral admixtures in the manufacture of Corrosion Resistant Concrete (Reference Specification S8-C04 Corrosion Control for Portland Cement Concrete). The Benecia-Martinez bridge includes provisions for using Corrosion Resistant Concrete. At this late stage we are wondering how Micron3 can be used in this project. Robert Reis and Vijay Jain at the Materials Engineering and Testing Services agree that Micron3 is an acceptable alternative to silica fume or metakaolin for Corrosion Resistant Concrete. They are currently working with Tom Ruckman of Specification Development to include the material in Caltrans specification for Corrosion Resistant Concrete. However, it is my understanding that this may not be completed in time to be included into the Benicia-Martinez Bridge project specifications. The key question that I have is how to include this material at this stage as an alternative to silica fume and/or metakaolin in the Benicia-Martinez Bridge project? I was thinking that perhaps a contractor request or an addendum to the project specifications may be an option. Do you have any suggestions? Due to the recent supply problems related to Metakaolin and the high costs associated with silica fume we feel that allowing Micron3 in this job would help achieve excellent corrosion resistant concrete at reduced costs.

The reference specification referred to is not part of the special provisions for this project. Use of silica fume and metakaolin is not mandatory on this project, but both are allowed as may be necessary for the Contractor's mix designs to meet the design and specifications requirements. Contractors may always propose a cost-reduction-incentive-proposal to the Engineer for consideration that requests using MICRON3 as acceptable admixture.

289. Could you please let me know if you will be postponing the bid due to many questions that are still pending?

Please see Addendum #11.

290. We have several people we need to fly into California (from various locations in the country) for the Benicia - Martinez Bridge project that bids on 9/18, I saw that Caltrans has postponed bids for this week. We would like to know if this job will also be postponed for one week to allow for all of us to gather up our people. If it will not be postponed I would need to have all of our people start driving across the country no later than Thursday 9/13, so they will be here in time for this bid.

Please see Addendum #11.

291. We would like to request a review of the Material Information Handout for hazardous and contaminated material,

Answer pending

292. Please let us know if there has been a postponement of the bid opening date. Presently, the opening date is 9/18/2001

Please see Addendum #11.

293. In reference to addendum No. 7 section 10-1.57 Welded Headed Bar Reinforcement, can you please advise if the test samples required in the QC procedures for production will be cut out of full length production bars or can a set sample be ran at the inspectors choise as to not waste the extra material?

As stated in the special provisions, test samples shall be randomly selected by the Engineer from each production lot of friction welded or integrally forged headed bar reinforcement, which is ready for shipment to the job site. When the Engineer selects from full length production bars, these bars will need to be replaced.

294. Sheet E-51, 121 of 557, As per detail "A" the bending radius of the 4'' and 5'' sealtite will not fit inside the abutment joint. On sheet 182 of 557, section "FF" scales out at 2 meters between the end of the box girder and the abutment wall. Requesting a revised detail. If the revised detail is not possible, how do you want the work bid?

Please bid according to plans and specifications.

295. Sheet E-29, 99 of 557, Detail "Typical Girder Light Fixture Detail", what type of junction box is required as shown on the detail? App 150 boxes on contract.

The Junction Box shall be NEMA Type 12 with screw cover.

296. Sheet E-11,81 of 557, Note 36 by abutment wall, need to know which conduits enter the junction box? Need detail.

All conduit go through the junction box, except conduit No. 1 and No. 3 that terminate in this junction box.

297. Sheet E-11, West side of the abutment, Section "F3-F3" (E-27) has only information about a cabinet foundation. Is there a cabinet to be installed? If so, what type and which conduits are to enter the cabinet?

Yes, only cabinet foundation needs to be installed and the communication cabinet shall be installed by others.

298. Sheet E-11, Girder Layout Span 2", section "DD" shows junction box (JB) on layout, there is no JB shown on section DD of sheet E-20. What size of JB and which conduits enter the JB?

For detail on span 2, see detail DD on sheet E-24.

299. Section JJ shows JB and wire trough (WT). Section JJ on sheet E-22 shows only a JB. Is there a WT? If so, what size, and which conduits enter the WT?

For detail on span 2, see detail JJ on sheet E-25.

300. Sheet E-11, "Girder Layout Span 1" & "Span 2", "see E-31 for more information". The girder layout shows conduits entering and by-passing the JB at piers 2 & 3. On sheet E-31, there are no details showing any of the conduits on the box girder wall entering the JB. This situation applies to pier 4 on E-12 also. Which conduits enter the JBs at piers 2, 3 & 4?

Answer pending

301. Sheet E-11 through E-19, missing switches for box girder lighting. Are switch boxes part of this contract? If so, what are the locations?

Answer pending

302. Sheet E-11, Girder Layout Span 1, section II, (E-22) conduit # 18, appears to be part of the 2'' cross over from note 3, section DD does not show conduit # 18. Where does C # 18 terminate?

Answer pending

303. Sheet E-23, Section AA & BB, what size & type are the JBs?

Answer pending

304. Concerning Section 10-1.57, Welded Headed Bar Reinforcement, Addendum #&. Does tensile test machinery and operators need Caltrans certification in order to perform tests?

Answer pending

305. Concerning Section 10-1.57, Welded Headed Bar Reinforcement, Addendum #7 . Will Caltrans certify Manufacturers Engineer to witness or conduct such tests?

Answer pending

306. Concerning Section 10-1.57, Welded Headed Bar Reinforcement, Addendum #7. Will Caltrans Engineer travel out of state to witness such tests?

Answer pending

307. Concerning Section 10-1.57, Welded Headed Bar Reinforcement, Addendum #7. Will Caltrans certify independent test labs to witness or conduct such tests?

Answer pending

308. Concerning Section 10-1.57, Welded Headed Bar Reinforcement, Addendum #7. Will Caltrans provide list of certified test labs, which may witness or conduct such tests?

Answer pending

309. Concerning Section 10-1.57, Welded Headed Bar Reinforcement, Addendum #7. Will Caltrans allow job-site sample testing or shall all testing be conducted prior to shipment to jobsite?

Answer pending

310. If we elect to use temporary casing to install all of the 2.2 meter rock socket portion of the CIDH piles I understand that we will have to complete
a load test at pier 10, as well as the contract test A. Will the Engineer delete the requirement for the over ream and fill load test B if the casing
method meets the load requirements?

Answer pending

311. We understand that to temporary case the piles at pier 10, 13, and 14 will require a CRIP to allow the temporary casing method. How long will the Engineer require to approve of the CRIP for this change?

Answer pending

312. If we run temporary casing to the tip of the CIDH pile will the Engineer delete the requirement for polymer slurry?

Answer pending

313. The special provisions suggest that one method of inspection for the CIDH piles that would be acceptable is video inspection. What other method are acceptable?

Answer pending

314. Special Provisions, section 5-1.12 payments: Item "V" is this to include all conduit and pull boxes for all work related to the bridge? If not
the seismic is a very small portion of the contract and it would not make sense to restrict the MOH payment to a small part of the contract.

Answer pending

315. Sheet E-34, E-19, & 131 of 557. At hinge A & B, which contract completes the electrical (sealtite) connection? Is it this contract or the other
contract for the work north of hinge A & B?

Answer pending

316. There are no specifications for the seismic casing to be installed in the piles at pier 8. What type of material is required for the casing? I
assume there will be no response to this question. It will not be possible to include the cost to install the casing without this information. I assume the installation will be by change order.

Answer pending

########### PLEASE NOTE: INQUIRY #216, Part A and B has been revised as of August 13, 2001. ###############