|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Caltrans
>
DRI
Home
>
Call for
Submissions
>
Questions and Answers
|
Questions and Answers |
| |
MA-513 "Feasibility Study for the Use of Biodiesel
in the Caltrans Fleet"
|
Information: |
The note below is from
the California Air Reources Board and is pertinent to our project:
Diesel emission control strategy verifications
apply to fuel types of CARB diesel or ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD)
only. Unless biodiesel fuel is specified as an operation
requirement under the verification executive order, biodiesel is
not an accepted fuel for use with these products or systems.
The note is available at
http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verdev.htm: |
|
|
| |
MA-502 "Validation of Percent Wet Time Statewide"
| Question
1: |
How does Caltrans
currently use percent wet time in calculating wet weather rates?
|
| Answer 1: |
| RE(wet) |
= |
Average Wet Accident
Rate, in wet accident/million vehicle(ACCS/MV) or wet
accident/million vehicle mile (ACCS/MVM) |
| |
= |
0.3(1-wt%)+3.2(RE)
1+2.2(wt%) |
| |
RE = Average Accident Rate, in
accident/million vehicle(ACCS/MV) or accident/ million vehicle
mile (ACCS/MVM)
wt% = percentage of wet time, in decimal. |
|
|
| Question
2: |
What information is
included in the Wet Table C report? |
| Answer 2: |
Location, Rate Group,
Total wet accidents (3 year, 2 year, 1 year, 6 month, 3 month),
Average ADT, Collision Rates (Fatal + Injury and total for both the
location and the statewide average for that rate group). |
|
| Question
3: |
What precisely is the
level of detail of wet pavement factors currently used by Caltrans?
For example, the Request for Proposals mentions that data is
countywide--within counties, are wet pavement factors specific for
months? |
| Answer 3: |
No, the values are not
currently time specific but location specific with a single value
per County. |
|
| Question
4: |
In the best of all
possible worlds, what level of detail would be ideal for updated wet
pavement factors, geographically (e.g., by milepost?) and temporally
(e.g., by day of the year?). |
| Answer 4: |
Rainfall varies so much
by day over the years that even in the best of all possible worlds,
by day of the year is not meaningful. So in the best of all possible
worlds, geographically by milepost would be ideal, but the ideal
time increment temporally would remain an annual average, anything
less wouldn’t be practical. |
|
| Question
5: |
Is it possible to get
copies (or more complete references) of the four documents listed
under "Related Research"?
- Method to Determine the Exposure of Vehicles to Wet Pavements, January
1972
- Evaluation of Minor Improvements, Part 8, December 1972
- Evaluation of Minor Improvements, (supplemental report) Part 8,
September 1975
- Wet-Pavement Safety Programs, July 1990 |
| Answer 5: |
We need more time to
track down these documents and scan them. |
|
| Question
6: |
Does Caltrans currently
collect any weather data? |
| Answer
6: |
Caltrans has a few
stations scattered statewide that collect weather data. |
|
|
|
|
MA-512 "What is the Best Method to Detect Objects
Hidden Under/in Snow, in Advance of Snow Removal Equipment"
| Question: |
I am trying to find any
prior research done or funded by Caltrans regarding one of the topic
listed in the 2005-RFP in the AHCMT site: " Evaluation of
Technologies and Approaches for Detection of Obstavles buried in
Snow". Some how I come across this project RTA65A0068 that may or
may not be relevant to the topic above. |
| Answer: |
This contract 65A0068 is
for 'advanced rotary snow plow' work. , there have been a couple of
technologies that were funded by this work. They have developed
automated rotary blower technology, (using DGPS and magnet
technology) although there are some problems running the system.
Another area of research that they looked into was mountain pass
openings, which uses DGPS as well as other sensors to map the road
during snow removal of mountain passes, they worked with the Crew in
LongBarn and are planning on testing again this spring. The third
area of research this contract covered was a 'snow penetrating
radar', currently they are developing a prototype radar that would
be able to detect images imbedded in the snow up to 6 feet. This
work does not have a final report, as this contract does not end
until June 30, 2005. Neither the 'pass opening' or the 'snow
penetrating radar' technologies are 'actual deliverables' for this
research and would have to be funded through the RDSC process if
Caltrans plans on continuing these efforts. |
|
|
| |
TS-518 "Radar Detector Evaluation and Calibration System"
| Question 1: |
Section II-Research Problem Statement
says, "The Division of Traffic Operations has developed an “end-use”
specification for Radar units". Can we get a copy of the "end-use"
specification and the reference documents cited in that "end-use"
specification? |
| Answer 1: |
|
|
| Question 2: |
Section VI – Related Research says,
"the Division of Research and Innovation (DRI) has internally
developed a lab-tested method of calibrating and testing Radar
units. This project would be a continuation of DRI's work." Can we
get a copy of reports or any documents related to DRI's work? |
| Answer 2: |
There is some information on the system
we used to evaluate Radar detectors. Please
CLICK HERE to go that website. |
|
|
| |
PA-504 "An Evaluation of the Crack, Seat and Overlay Method in California"
| Question 1: |
When you mentioned that identifying
these sections will require going
through construction record and verifying with field data (e.g.,
cores).
Who will be conducting this task, and is Caltrans willing to do the
coring
and data verification? |
| Answer 1: |
Going through the records will be the
responsibility of the contractor. CT will provide help in contacts
and gaining access (e.g., office of pavement rehab, districts,
etc.). Coring will also be the responsibility of the contractor.
Usually contractors sub out this and the traffic control to meet DBE
requirements. Again CT will provide contact help with the District
Traffic Control Centers for arranging times to core. |
|
| Question 2: |
Field survey, is it done by Caltrans
(like automated video survey) or
would it be done manually by the research crew supported by Caltrans? |
| Answer 2: |
The field survey is manual survey using
the CT Pavement Survey Guide. This probably should be done with J
Poppe's crew (Caltrans) since any historical data would have been
done by his crew (and therefore we get a consistent history). The CT
folks would work with J Poppe on scheduling. |
|
| Question 3: |
We don't know how many sections are
there to survey and core, etc. So the challenge will be in putting
together an estimated budget for this project. Any advice? |
| Answer 3: |
The preliminary estimate for this
problem statement was $100,000, but respondents are asked to
identify the number of sections, so the budget could vary. |
|
|
| |
EV-505 "The effects of construction activities on Valley Elderberry
Longhorn Beetle habitat"
| Question: |
I'm wanting to submit a pre-proposal
for EV-505 on construction and the Valley Elderberry Longhorn
Beetle. Do you have any more information about the expected duration
of projects or permissible budget amounts? |
| Answer: |
The authors of problem statement EV-505
recommend that respondents propose the time and budget they feel
necessary to fit the work. Otherwise, we may be putting artificial
limitations on the study which limit us in getting the best possible
product. |
|
|
| |
General
| Question
1: |
When the CFS says that
an annual budget is required, does this need to be by project year
(Oct 1-Sept 30th) or financial year (July 1 to June 30th)? |
| Answer 1: |
Please estimate the
annual budget by fiscal year (July 1 to June 30). We have a start
date of Oct. 1st (or later) because we need several months to
process the contracts. |
|
| Question
2: |
Will projects funded
directly through Caltrans cover tuition and fees? |
| Answer 2: |
According to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-21, Section J-41, either
compensation in the form of remittance of fees, tuition, housing,
etc... can be paid or a salary can be paid but not both. This
information can be found at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a021/a021.html. |
|
| Question
3: |
| Please let me know whether the
statements below are correct and, if not, what indirect cost
policy we should utilize. |
|
- |
We may submit proposals using our
normal indirect cost rate, calculated on Total Direct Costs.
|
|
- |
Subcontractors are not required
to use our indirect cost rate, but may use their own normal
indirect cost rate, calculated on Total Direct Costs. |
|
| Answer 3: |
The allowable indirect
costs will depend on the funding source and contract mechanism,
which has not yet been assigned to the potential proposals. So
proceed to submit your proposal with your normal indirect cost rate
(based on your total direct costs), and your subcontractor's
indirect cost rate (based on their indirect costs). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last Updated:
09/28/2006 |
|
|
|
