Caltrans Office Engineer

Viewing inquiries for 01-0C7304

Submit new inquiry for this project

Inquiry #1: According to Section 83-1.02B(1)(c)(ii) Earthwork, areas to receive minor concrete must be graded to smooth uniform surface. The majority of the existing guardrail already has vegetation control concrete, yet there is no mention of existing concrete.What shall be done with the existing concrete surfacing?
Inquiry submitted 04/11/2013

Response #1:4/11/13: Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed. Thank you for your patience.
Response posted 04/11/2013

Response #2:4/19/13: Pleae refer to Section 15-1.01 of the 2010 Standard Specifications for existing concrete surfacing which requires removal.
Response posted 04/19/2013

Inquiry #2: Please do not respond “Bid per plans and specifications”, because the requirement for dry gradation in the Quality Control Requirements Table on Page 21 will in all likelihood result in no bids by CIR contractors. First, there is no way in CIR to guarantee the gradation of a roadway constructed in-place will fall within the specified limits of the JMF that is synthetically put together. And 20 plus years and millions of SYs of CIR has proven there is no need for it to. Secondly, since it is RAP, Caltrans’ own tests methods require drying at 105 degs. F. At that temperature it is impossible to do a full washed gradation per CT 202 and meet the 24 hour reporting requirements. More reasonable will be 72 hours. However, that would require the added expense of someone taking it to a laboratory each night. Finally, what if the results do not meet the specified ranges (which have a typo; they are one line too high)? Will the entire CIR mat constructed the previously three days need to be removed and replaced? How can someone take that risk on something that they have virtually no or little ability to control? The idea of taking samples and doing full gradations is good, but they should be report only and be required within one week after completion of the CIR. They could then be used for comparison to the field wet gradations and provide valuable research information.

Other things that require clarification or additional consideration by the State:

CIR Quality Control Requirements Table (pg. 21) and Its Footnotes: With respect to CT216 - This test procedure is for sand cone testing and obtaining the maximum wet density using a moisture relationship. This test procedure does not apply to CIR and is not appropriate. As specified, the break over curve is used instead for the relative compaction. If the State just wants this information fine, but please explain footnote C, “If the lot fails minimum test frequency is 1 per lot”. Fails what?

With respect to CT231 - This nuclear gauge test does not apply to CIR. This method is for soil and aggregate (base) testing using direct penetration into the material. A more appropriate test would be CT 375 “Determining the in-place density and relative compaction of asphalt concrete pavement.”

On that same page is the statement “If the dry gradation results show a difference greater than 2” Greater than 2 what? What does this mean?

Section 30-4.01C(1) General: It requires within 3 business days of sampling, submit test results for ERA. But under Section 30-4.01C(2) it requires test results within 30 days of delivery. Is the 3 day requirement for the sample taken as a requirement of Section 30-4.01D(4)(a)? The issue is there are no testing requirements of the ERA sample taken by and for the contractor. So what tests results must be submitted within 3 days of sampling? What testing is required of the ERA on Contractor “QC” samples.

Section 30-4.03D(1) General: In item 1 it excludes conduction of CIR if the pavement is wet. Why? Water is added to the CIR anyway. Sometimes it is advantageous to prewet the pavement.

Section 30-4.02H Asphaltic Emulsion: It appears that this is for the fog seal. It specifies that Grade SSIh and Grade CSS1h are to be used. Why can’t the ERA be used for fog seal on this project like the 30 other State CIR projects before this one?

Section 30-4.03H Supplemental Compaction: It requires recompaction of CIR within 48-72 hours of initial compaction. Recompaction should be after curing is complete to be most effective. In most cases the 48-72 hours works for that. However with traffic closure limitations there is no way to recompact within 72 hours since the CIR operation will be longer than 3 days. The CIR operation will have to be stopped for several days while recompaction catches up. The CIR operation should be continuous and then recompaction of the entire roadway should be conducted right after curing is complete. Does the State think that it is important enough to recompact within 72 hours that it is willing to pay for the cost of standby of the CIR and paving equipment that will be built into the price for the CIR?

Inquiry submitted 04/22/2013

Response #1:4/23/13: 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 04/23/2013

Response #2:4/24/13: Your inquiry is under review. Please refer to Addendum Number 2.
Response posted 04/24/2013

Response #3: 5/3/13: Please refer to Addendum Number 3 . The information is posted at
Response posted 05/03/2013

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.