Viewing inquiries for 03-3F4404

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: Bid Item 31 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A)

1. Plant binder set point cannot be adjusted off of the design OBC for Mix verification: Section 39 (input section and paragraph) states: "Use the OBC specified on your Contractor Hot Mix Asphalt Design Data form. No adjustments to asphalt binder content are allowed." These requirements are new to section 39 which historically has allowed the contractor to adjust the laboratory design OBC (taget value) to accomodate changes in the aggregate binder set point to account for plant variability. Not being allowed to adjust the mix design OBC and binder set point will likely result in failed mix verifications. When this occurs as a result of these new provisions, will Caltrans compensate the contractor for lost time, wasted hot mix, and cost of testing associated with the failed mix verification?

Inquiry submitted 11/21/2013

Response #1:11/21/13: Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/21/2013


Response #2:12/4/13: Please bid per the contract documents.
Response posted 12/04/2013




Inquiry #2: Has a Risk Level been established for this project?
Inquiry submitted 11/21/2013

Response #1:11/21/13: Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/21/2013


Response #2:11/22/13: No.
Item 6, "Prepare Water Pollution Control Program" is covered under Section 13-11.01A(2),Submittals of the Special Provisions, the revised Standard Specifications, (page 37 of 278 of the contract documents) and Section 13-2 of the 2010 Standard Specifications.
There is no reference to risk level as risk level is in reference to a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, Section 13-3 of the 2010 Standard Specifications. Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 11/22/2013




Inquiry #3: Bid Item 31 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A):

2. Binder target value cannot be adjusted from CEM 3512 during production. Section 39 (input section and paragraph) states: "During production, asphalt binder set point for HMA Type A, HMA Type B, HMA Type C, and RHMA-G must be the OBC shown in Contractor Hot Mix Asphalt Design Data form. For OGFC, asphalt binder set point must be the OBC shown on the Caltrans Hot Mix Asphalt Verification form." These requirements are new to section 39 specifications which have historically allowed the contractor to adjust the plant binder set point to account for plant variability. Not being allowed to adjust the binder set point to target the CEM 3512 OBC during production will increase the probability of negative pay factors and/or high performing HMA pavements being rejected. Will Caltrans issue a change order removing the above noted language, i.e., "during production, asphalt binder set point for HMA Type A, HMA Type B, HMA Type C, and RHMA-G must be the OBC shown in Contractor Hot Mix Asphalt Design Data form" and, "For OGFC, asphalt binder set point must be the OBC shown on Caltrans Hot Mix Asphalt Verification form." from the contract specifications?

Inquiry submitted 11/21/2013

Response #1:11/21/13: Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/21/2013


Response #2:11/22/13: Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 11/22/2013




Inquiry #4: Bid Item # 31 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A):

3. TSR dry strength of 120 minimum for 3/8" or RHMA-G and PG 64-28 (or softer) binders: In Section 39 the table titled "Additional HMA Mix Design Requirements for RAP Substitution Rate Greater Than 15 Percent"requires a CT 371 dry strength of 120 psi. The specification also requires the HMA mixture to incorporate a PG 64-28 binder in the asphalt mixture. Historical dry tensile strength data for mixes containing a PG 64-28 binder indicates that a dry tensile strength of 120 psi is not achievable. This information is based on the use of soft binders in the State Of Nevada over a number of years and the recognized influence of the asphalt binder grade on the achievable dry tensile strength. Recognizing the limitation on the dry tensile strength in the mixtures containing soft and/or modified binders, the Nevada Department Of Transportation has established a minimum dry tensile strength of 65 psi. It has also recognized that in some instances highly modified or altered specialty binders exceeding the minimum requirements of the specified binder may be used to produce mixtures meeting the minimum dry tensile strength requirement. Because these binders are considered "hybrid sole source" binders, there is a premium cost associated with their acquisition. If it is determined that a minimum 120 psi dry tensile strength is unachievable,with the specified PG 64-28 binder and an altered "sole source" binder is required to meet the dry tensile strength requirement, will Caltrans waive this requirement by way of a change order or compensate the contractor for the additional cost associated with "hydrid sole source" binder?

Inquiry submitted 11/21/2013

Response #1:11/22/13: Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/22/2013


Response #2:11/22/13: Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 11/22/2013




Inquiry #5: Bid Item # 31 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A)

4. Section 39-1.31 Warm Mix Asphalt Technology Otion: Section 39 (input section and paragraph) states: "You may produce HMA Type A, Type B, or RHMA-G using an authorized warm mix asphalt (WMA) technology. For Department-authorized WMA technologies, go to the METS Web site."This implies that a standard Hot Mix Asphalt option is the standard mix and that specifications in section 39-1.03 through 39-1.30 of the RSS specifications apply to the mix if Warm Mix option is not chosen. Can you please clarify that the warm mix option is just in fact an "option" and that a standard hot mix asphalt pavement shall meet the RSS specifications for HMA rather than specification stated in Section 39-1.31 for Warm Mix option?

Inquiry submitted 11/21/2013

Response #1:11/22/13: Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/22/2013


Response #2:11/22/13: Per Section 39-1.31 "Warm Mix Asphalt Technology Option" and the subsequent Section 39-1.31A(1), "Summary" of the Special Provisions, Warm Mix Asphalt Technology is an option that the contractor may choose but it is not required.
As noted on page 23 of the Special Provisions, Section 39-1.01A, "Produce and place HMA Type A under the standard process." Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 11/22/2013




Inquiry #6: Is epoxy coated rebar required for the Minor Concrete (Minor Structures)?
Inquiry submitted 11/22/2013

Response #1:11/22/13: Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/22/2013


Response #2:11/25/13: Yes. Please refer to Addendum No. 3 dated Monday, November 25, 2013.
Response posted 11/25/2013




Inquiry #7: Section 39-1.18A(1): "Treat HMA aggregate with lime using the dry lime method either with marination or without. Treat aggregate for HMA (Type A) with dry lime."

Section 39-1.19A(1): "Treat HMA aggregate with lime using the slurry method and place it in stockpiles to marinate. Treat aggregate for HMA (Type A) with lime slurry."

Which specification governs?

Inquiry submitted 11/25/2013

Response #1:11/25/13: Your question is under review. If a response is not issued before bid opening addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract documents. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/25/2013


Response #2: 12/6/13: An addendum is under consideration. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 12/06/2013


Response #3: 12/6/13: Please refer to Addendum Number 5, dated December 6, 2013. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 12/06/2013




Inquiry #8: Both the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) and The Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan) define the "grading season" as May 15th to October 15th with regard to soil disturbance. The contract special provisions do not address these dates, with relationship to the notice to proceed date and the standard specifications do not apply to these restrictions. What is the anticpated notice to proceed date for this project?
Inquiry submitted 11/26/2013

Response #1:11/26/13: Your inquiry is under review. Please note that due to the current time frame between the inquiry submittal and the bid opening date, a response may not be provided before the bid opening. If a response is not provided before the bid opening addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract documents. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/26/2013


Response #2:12/6/13: Please refer to Addendum Number 2, dated November 22, 2013, Section 10, "General". "Replace "Reserved" in Section 10-1.03 of the RSS for Section 10-1 with: No Construction activity is allowed within the project limits before June 2014." In addition, please refer to the next paragraph in the same addendum,
"In the Special Provisions, Section 68 the following paragraph is added before the first paragraph. "Do not begin work on the underdrain system before the day after Labor Day."" Please bid per the contract documents.

Response posted 12/06/2013




Inquiry #9: Section 13-11.03 - Construction - Temporary Clear Water Diversion System.

The specifications state "Use of the temporary clear water diversion system is restricted to the period from July 15 to October 15." If the temporary clear water diversion system is required to perform the work, and is thus a critical path item to perform the work, Is the notice to proceed date July 15th? Since there are 80 working days on this contract, is it anticipated that this is a 2 season project with the October 15th grading and soil disturbance restriction?

Inquiry submitted 11/26/2013

Response #1:11/26/13: Your inquiry is under review. Please note that due to the current time frame between the inquiry submittal and the bid opening date, a response may not be provided before the bid opening. If a response is not provided before the bid opening addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract documents. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 11/26/2013


Response #2:12/6/13: Please refer to the response to Inquiry #8 for the construction activity start date. This project is not anticipated to be a two season project.
Response posted 12/06/2013




Inquiry #10: Bid Item # 4 Portable Changeable Message Signs

How many portable changeable message signs are required for this project? The special provisions and plans do not indicate a quantity.

Inquiry submitted 11/26/2013

Response #1:12/2/13:Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.

Response posted 12/02/2013


Response #2:12/2/13: Please refer to Section 12-3.12C of the Special Provisions, page 10,
"Place the portable changeable message sign in advance of the 1st warning sign for each:
1. Stationary lane closure
2. Shoulder closure"

The Contractor's operation will determine the number of portable changeable message signs. Please bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 12/02/2013




Inquiry #11: The "plans" tab for addendum no. 5 issued this morning is linked to the addendum "narrative". The replacement plans are not uploaded.

Pls upload the replacement plan sheets as mentioned in the
addendum narrative.

Inquiry submitted 12/06/2013

Response #1:12/6/13: Thank you for the notification. We are working on resolving the issue. We appreciate your patience.
Response posted 12/06/2013


Response #2:12/6/13: The plan sheets for Addendum Number 5 dated December 6, 2013 are now posted.
Response posted 12/06/2013






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