Attachment 7 - QA Document 2.pdf

Second Q&A

1. Who takes ownership of the millings?

Contractor to take ownership of millings and remove from site upon comple�on of the project.

2. Were there core samples taken during the Geological Survey (no evidence of such). Cores are important to determine how to propose. (knowledge of exis�ng road materials and depth determines necessary construc�on needs).

No core samples were taken. ARS requests limited core sampling be included in the bidder’s scope and pricing as a confirming means of corrobora�ng their proposed methodology.

3. The drawing show to only do overlay on a lot of areas that appear the subgrade is compromised. It was stated that if you just overlay on those areas, the problema�c issues will return in most cases. (the whole east campus road and lot of Fort Reno Road is shown as overlay only, but shows a lot of signs of compromised subgrade) Drawings are reques�ng both an overlay and a fabric reinforcement layer on the old pavement.

Designer of Record has had good luck in Oklahoma with saving pavement using the fabric. It helps bridge over the compromised subgrade and offers a cost-effec�ve alterna�ve to complete tear outs of pavement sec�on. Contractor is requested to perform work per drawings.

4. What is in the base bid (Phase 1) vs the two alternates (Phases 2 and 3)?

Phases are shown on drawings page 5 through 9.

5. Can ARS confirm contractors are to be working on the east side of the pond bridge?

Phases and construc�on limits are shown on drawings page 5 through 9 per legend on each drawing.

6. Can the Superintendent, QC Manager and SSHO be 1 individual?

Yes, as long as individual meets training requirements and can be available as required by contract.

7. Can the government provide load ra�ngs for the exis�ng bridge on drawing number 13?

See atached “LR Summary (Ft El Reno Bridge).pdf.”

8. What is the detail for the wingwalls? ODOT 2009, ODOT 2019, other? Can we match exis�ng to keep things uniform?

Exis�ng construc�on can be matched as long as it conforms and matches ODOT requirements.

9. Fence repairs. Will the contractor be responsible for repairing fencing removed or cut for construc�on?

Yes, repair / replace fence in kind. Coordinate temporary fence removal or cu�ng with loca�on ensuring farm animals do not have avenue of escaping fences. USDA will control catle by moving herds or construc�ng temporary fencing. Coordinate any fence removal/cu�ng with loca�on. Once road construc�on in the affected area is complete, the fencing should be repaired/replaced in kind, by contractor.

10. Are we changing the road grade to accommodate the new RCBs (boxes)?

Yes, the design intent was for the pavement patching to be able to raise the grade smoothly to accommodate the RCB culvert replacement.

11. New RCB near match-line at Highway? (contractors ques�oned the necessity of construc�ng a waterway there, there’s not one currently and our road is the high spot) Contractor to install per drawings. This is needed because water running along the north side of Route 66 currently gets trapped at the east side of the drive. This was causing ponding at the NW corner of the roadway entrance.

12. Will pre-cast RCBs be accepted?

Precast concrete box sec�ons are acceptable provided they conform to Sec�on 726.01 of ODOT specifica�ons. If precast units are used, an aggregate base a minimum of 12” thick should be provided to ensure precast units are evenly supported.

13. Drawings show new RCBs W/O (without) wing walls. What is proposed for erosion control?

The RCB call should have been “RCBs W/ODOT wing walls” not “RCBs W/O wing walls” Drawings have the wing walls included in the details and in the quan��es page. On Details B and C on Dwg 7, wing walls are shown.

14. Detail C on Sheet 7 shows the RCB to be installed with wings only. The exis�ng structure has a spillway-type structure constructed with the wings on the inlet end, see atached photo. Is that to be re-established? Can a detail for how to address this be provided?

The spillway type structure is not required anymore, a standard headwall can be installed.

15. From page 4 of the drawings typical sec�on 1, what material is requested for the shoulders?

Aggregate Base Type A

16. Referring to the original RFI ques�on 4. It should have read “surface coarse” not “surface cores”. Will we allow milling in “surface coarse”? Do we want virgin material or is recycled material acceptable?

The correct term is “surface course”. Milling will be allowed in the surface course if it is called for in the contract documents. All materials shall be “virgin.”

17. ODEQ storm water permit who is providing?

Contractor to provide as required.

18. Are as-built drawings available for exis�ng pavement and structures but primarily for subgrade u�lity locate protocol?

Yes

19. In the Full-Depth Reconstruc�on areas, is the base supposed to be 8” Compacted Subgrade (as shown in Typical Sec�on #2) or 8” Stabilized Subgrade as represented on the Summary of Pay Items and Summary of Surfacing?

Stabilized subgrade

20. Are we allowed to close the roadway to traffic while working on the full-depth reconstruc�on areas? If so, are there dura�on limits associated with the closures? Are there certain dates that we must have all roadways open to traffic and avoid closures?

Yes road closures are acceptable. There are no dura�on limits associated with the closures. The last two weeks of September the roads must remain open. The USCA holds the Na�onal Cavalry Compe��on around the end of September every year. So we would need the main entrance road and main campus area completely open for the last 2 weeks of September. If alterna�ve access/entrance is required, we will provide and install the detour signage. Road closures will need to be coordinated with the Contrac�ng Officer Representa�ve (COR).

21. Are there any staging areas provided? Areas that we need to avoid while staging equipment/materials?

We haven’t determined any specific staging area at this point. However, finding an area near the construc�on loca�on shouldn’t be a problem.

22. What tes�ng frequency is to be followed? Are we to follow the ODOT FAST Guide for frequency and type of sampling required? Please confirm this is the responsibility of the Contractor to perform and provide results to Owner. If so, will the Owner perform Quality Assurance Tes�ng?

At what frequency? Has the QA firm been selected so we can plan to coordinate accordingly to avoid conflict?

Contractor to provide tes�ng and QA plan.

23. Will the oversight A&E set their own tes�ng schedule or follow ODOT (Oklahoma Department of Transporta�on)?

Tes�ng to be performed by contractor according to applicable ODOT standards and submited to ARS.

24. Are there any City Permits that will be required? Do we only need to get the ODEQ permits required for the SWPPP Documenta�on required by the Summary of Pay Items? Can the Stormwater Management Plan informa�on be provided by the design engineer? This informa�on is needed to obtain the necessary permits.

All permits to be provided by contractor when applicable. We are not within city limits, so city permits may not be required.

25. Are there any known u�lity conflicts? Who will be able to iden�fy/flag the u�li�es on this project?

Contractor’s responsibility to locate and mark u�li�es.

26. Detail A on Sheet 7 shows the installa�on of an 18” RCP outside the front entrance gate. The loca�on shown is at the high point of the driveway. The previous Q&A state that this structure was needed because of water running along the north side of SH-66. The roadside ditch does not coordinate with the loca�on as shown in the Plans. Is the intent of this structure to connect the roadside ditches along SH-66? If so, the length will need to be increased quite a bit. If it is to be installed as shown on the Plans, the drainage/grading required to get this to drain will likely impact the signage out front to �e into the exis�ng roadside ditches. Please advise.

The design intent is to prevent water from the roadside ditches of SH-66 from ponding un�l they flow over the drive. A ditch and culvert are proposed to convey that water, and the ditch should be able to fit between the exis�ng fence and the proposed layout of the driveway exit. Care should be taken to avoid the exis�ng signs.

27. Who will be responsible for replacing the loop detec�on at the front entrance? This will be removed during the reconstruc�on opera�ons.

Contractor shall replace.