Viewing inquiries for 09-354104

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: When the metal beam guard railing is removed, Is it required to replace what is removed with new railing in the same shift?
Inquiry submitted 07/30/2013

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


Response #2:Yes, or the hazard created by the removal must be protected by some other means. See section 7-1.04 and 83-1.02A of the Standard Specifications.
Response posted 07/31/2013




Inquiry #2: In Section 39 the table titled "Additional HMA Mix Design Requirements for RAP Substitution Rate Greater Than 15 Percent”, requires the Hamburg Wheel test (HWT) to be performed at 140F. (60C). The industry standard for the HWT test is (50C). Test to data indicates that performing this procedure at an elevated temperature will result in failing test for the same mix that meets the specification when performed at the standard test temperature (50C). If the mix fails to meet the HWT specification at 60C, will Caltrans issue a change order to reduce the test temperature requirement to the industry standard (50C) and compensate the contractor for the additional HWT testing?
Inquiry submitted 07/30/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/31/2013


Response #2:Bid the project as the specifications indicate, unless altered by an addendum.
Response posted 08/01/2013




Inquiry #3: In Section 39 the table titled “Hot Mix Asphalt Mix Design Requirements” requires the mix to be produced with a DP of 0.9-2.0. The industry standard and Caltrans previous specification requires a DP of 0.6-1.2. It is widely accepted by HMA designers that attempts to design a 3/8” Type A mixes with a DP of 0.6-2.0 can be problematic. Specifically, meeting the percent voids filled with asphalt (VFA) “keyhole” of 73% to 76%, the minimum percent voids in mineral aggregate(VMA), and the minimum Hveem stability requirements. It is very difficult to produce a mixture having these properties in a laboratory environment and near impossible to consistently replicate these properties through an HMA plant. Trying to increase VMA to meet the minimum requirement will generally results in less particle-on-particle contacts leading to reduced stability. Trying to achieve a VFA of 73% to 76% generally requires increased binder and/or increased rock dust also resulting in lower stabilities. If the mixture cannot be produced at the specified 0.9-2.0 DP will Caltrans issue a change order lowering the DP to the industry standard of 0.6 to 1.2 and compensate the contractor for failed attempts to meet the elevated DP?
Inquiry submitted 07/30/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/31/2013


Response #2:Bid the project as the specifications indicate, unless altered by an addendum.
Response posted 08/01/2013




Inquiry #4: Section 39-1.02D (1) of the contract special provision states “For HMA-SP (Type A) the grade of binder must be 64-28.” In this district and area, Caltrans historically has specified PG 64-28 PM. Is it the State’s intention to require PG 64-28PM for this project?
Inquiry submitted 07/30/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/31/2013


Response #2:Bid the project as the specifications indicate, unless altered by an addendum.
Response posted 08/01/2013




Inquiry #5: 1. The following statements are included in the referenced specification sections:
• Section 39-1.01C (2) (b): “For HMA mixes utilizing RAP the maximum binder replacement is 25.0 percent for surface mixes and 40.0 percent for lower courses.”
• Section 39-1.02A: “Use RAP for HMA-SP (Type A), and HMA-SP (Type C) as part of the virgin aggregate in a quantity equal to 25.0 ± 1.0 percent of the aggregate blend.”
• Section 39-1.02J (1): “HMA-SP (Type A), and HMA-SP (Type C) must have 25 ± 4 percent RAP.”

It is possible that percent binder replacement limits will be exceeded using 25% RAP, especially for surface mixes. Which specification requirement governs?

Inquiry submitted 08/01/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.

Response posted 08/02/2013


Response #2:Refer to Addendum #2 dated August 2, 2013
Response posted 08/02/2013




Inquiry #6: Will RAP usage of less than 25% be allowed?
Inquiry submitted 08/01/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.

Response posted 08/02/2013


Response #2:Refer to Addendum #2 dated August 2, 2013
Response posted 08/02/2013




Inquiry #7: Design and quality control tables in Section 39 of the project specifications require a minimum CT 371 (TSR) dry strength of 120 psi. The specification also requires the HMA mixture use PG 64-28 binder. Historical dry tensile strength data for mixes containing “soft” binders, such as PG 64-28 binder, indicates that a dry tensile strength of 120 psi is very difficult to achieve. If it is determined that a minimum 120 psi dry tensile strength is practically 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 “sole source” binder?


Inquiry submitted 08/01/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.

Response posted 08/02/2013


Response #2:No, this specification will be enforced as written.
Response posted 08/02/2013






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.