GAOA_CDA_Slurry_Seal_-_Soliciation_Questions_Answers_0001.pdf

1. Asphalt paving thickness

a. Plan sheet C2 calls out “minimum depth” of 4” of asphalt. For proper compaction of asphalt, it needs to be about 3-6 times the nominal aggregate size, so for 4” asphalt and ½” mix we would need to replace the asphalt in 2 lifts. The issue with this is that some of the patches are so small, that effective compaction equipment, or even common hand tools, cannot fit in some of the smaller patches, so it would not be possible to install in 2 lifts and ensure compaction on the base lift. For reference the smallest roller commonly used is 4’.

i.Would it be possible to perform these repairs in 3”? this is compactable from above and completed in 1 lift ii.Was the depth set at 4” because this is the existing parking lot thickness, was it cored, or was there a Geotech report?

A1. Site asphalt was not cored nor surveyed for current thickness conditions.

Original site paving installed 3” asphaltic concrete. Site has been seal coated twice since original paving but should still be nomically 3” thick. It would be acceptable to complete patching in a single lift, matching the existing thickness, providing for proper compaction. Extend repair areas in accordance with subsection 418.04(a) of the specifications.

2. Traffic control

a. This patching will be pretty invasive to traffic and block the boat ramp. Would the parking lot be closed during repairs? I estimate 3 days for the saw cutting, dig out and repaving.

A2. Blackwell Island Rec site will be closed to the public from Mid-October 2025 until May 21st, 2026. Contractor would have access to the site during that time.

3. Testing

a. I’m not super familiar with the governing specifications for this job, but I had a couple questions about testing, i.Is it the intent for the prime contractor to hire a 3rd party testing agency as part of this proposal?

ii.For asphalt testing specifically, it looks like most the of 403 sections has been replaced with an alternate testing table. Is the intent to only test smoothness (straight edge) and compaction? I just wanted to ensure there wasn’t any volumetrics testing anticipated

A3: Yes, the intent is for the contractor to hire a 3rd party testing agency. In addition to the other submittal requirements, the testing requirements are compaction, smoothness and temperature in accordance with FP-14, section 418, subsection 403.09, and Table 403-2.

4. In the project specifications in the Period of Performance section. It states that no work can be performed between May 23rd and September 2nd and that the period of performance is 60 days after labor day. Based on October historical records of weather in Coeur D'Alene the average temperature of 47 degrees with an average of 13 rain days during the month. I could foresee issues with completing the work this calendar year.

A4: Work is to take place between labor day and Memorial Day. Initially, the project was to be limited to 60 days following labor day. Unforeseeable delays have pushed the construction timeline into that 60 day period, so the period of performance has been updated to include time prior to Memorial that that will also be weather appropriate for paving.

5. I see on the bid schedule there are Fall/ Autumn Priorities and Spring Priorities. Is there the potential to be able to complete all the work in the spring when temps return to a workable range? Or the ability to complete the asphalt patching in the fall and the remaining work be completed in the spring?

A5: The government would prefer to complete the work in a way that has less impact to the public use of the recreation sites. There are a couple sites that are much less busy in the Fall than they are in the Spring. These sites are listed as the Fall/Autumn priorities. Only if weather does not allow for any paving during the Fall/Autumn would there be justification for completing all the sites in the Spring.

6. We have a question regarding the asphalt patching that is indicated on drawings sheet C2, Note 8 which applies to drawing sheets C2, C3 and C4. Note 8 states "Full depth of patches are type 2 - in accordance with specification 418.04" however this specification section is not included in the Specifications provided. Can you please provide specification 418.04?

A6: The specifications provided in the contract only supplement the FP-14 book and rely on the contractor to have a copy of FP-14 available for reference.

418.04 Asphalt Pavement Full Depth Patch, Type 2 (FDP-2).

(a) Patch areas. Extend the repair area 12 inches (300 millimeters) beyond the distressed area. If patch limits are within 24 inches (600 millimeters) of the pavement edge, extend the patch limit to the pavement edge. Make the minimum length and width of the patch 36 inches (900 millimeters).

(b) Pavement removal. See Subsection 418.03(b), except remove the pavement to expose subbase or subgrade as shown in the plans.

(c) Patching. Apply a tack coat to the edges of the patch area according to Section 412. Place and compact asphalt concrete pavement so the patched surface matches the same grade as the adjacent surface.

A digital copy of the FP-14 specification book can be downloaded here:

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/specs https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/specs

7. From the onsite meeting it sounded like the intent was to have a 3rd party test compaction and some form of volumetrics. I was wondering specifically what the specific testing requirements would be for 106.04 “Use prevailing industry standards in the absence of contract requirements or tolerances. Submit measurements, tests, and supporting data for acceptance”

A7: The requirements are listed or referenced in specification 418. See subsections 418.04 and 418.07. They refer to Section 403 Asphalt Concrete requirements. Section 403 includes pre-construction submittal requirements and construction testing requirements. These requirements apply to this contract as referenced by Section 418 of the specifications.

Subsection 106.04 of the specifications only applies “in the absence of contract requirements or tolerances.” We are not aware of any absence or omission of these requirements.

8. I referenced the ISPWC (Idaho Standard for Public works) Section 810 (plant mix paving) 3.12 A for prevailing standards. It call out the attached spec referencing testing for AC content and gradation which follows the process control specs above fairly closely- would this be an acceptable test method?

A8: A Job Mix Formula will need to be submitted and approved in accordance with the contract requirements.

• For Asphalt Concrete, refer to the specification in FP-14, subsection 403.02, Composition of Mix (JMF).

• For Slurry Seal, refer to the specification in FP-14, subsection 410.04, Composition of Mix (JMF).

9. Quantities

• Since the plan quantity is based on “distressed” area its likely that the quantity will increase due to the specifications outlined in 418.04A. will payment be based on the actual square footage marked by the owner’s representative since pavement repair must extend 12” beyond the distressed area? Or is it based on plan quantity?

A9: The quantity listed on Drawing C2 is an estimate of the total distressed area.

The quantity listed in the Schedule of Items is the total area of full depth patch including the extensions beyond the distressed areas required by subsection 418.04(a) with a tolerance for additional quantities.

Item 41802* Asphalt Pavement, Full Depth Patch, Type 2 (FDP-2), Blackwell Island is a Contract Quantity as indicated by the * and Note 1 at the bottom of the Schedule of Items. The note references subsection 109.02(b) of the specifications for the definition of a Contract Quantity.