B09-Amendment_1_RFI_1-3_0001.docx

140P4325R0024 – CACO Pavement McPherson Way Amendment 1; RFIs 1-3

Question 1: Some cracks noted on the road may actually exceed the 2” limit noted on the scope of work for the crack filling. In these cases, mastic would be used to fill these cracks, however there is no use of mastic mentioned in the SOW. Is there any desire for mastic to be used in these locations?

Response 1: The Scope of Work (SOW) intentionally limits crack filling to cracks 2 inches or less in width, consistent with standard practices for rubberized crack sealing. This approach is appropriate for the specified surface treatment (i.e., fog seal over sealed cracks).

Cracks wider than 2 inches are considered outside the project scope. These should be documented and brought to the attention of the Contracting Officer (CO) and Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) for possible exclusion or direction. The use of mastic is not required or approved under the current specification.

Question 2: Some cracks in the road are noticeably sloped due to the crown on the road. In these instances, it is impossible to fill these cracks to level as the rubber, in liquid form will run down the crack to the edge of the road. Again, this is an instance where we would normally use mastic. The crack can be filled with rubber; however, it will be impossible to fill the crack to level. If we are not using mastic in these locations, we simply want to make it know that this occurrence may happen in some locations.

Response 2: Section 32 01 17.61, Part 3.2.B.2 requires that, “after cooling, the level of the sealant shall be no more than 1/8 inch below the pavement surface,” and that cracks be slightly overfilled and leveled with a squeegee to form a 3–4-inch-wide band. These requirements apply regardless of roadway crown or slope. Given the relatively gentle crown on this residential road, proper application and leveling should prevent material flow or pooling. However, if specific locations exhibit slope steep enough to prevent compliance—such as where material flows downhill during curing—please document those areas. Include slope measurements (in percent grade or degrees) and photos. We will evaluate such cases individually and determine whether to allow a modified finish or require conformance with Section 3.2.C.

Guidance:

For slopes <4% (approx. ½ inch per foot), standard sealant should remain in place.

For slopes >6% (approx. ¾ inch per foot), and where liquid flow is observed, please flag for review.

Question 3: At the end of MacPherson way, there is an existing stop line, however there is no stop sign. Please confirm that the existing stop line is not necessary, and once the road is fog sealed, we will not need to repaint the line.

Response 3: There is no stop sign at the end of MacPherson Way, and the existing stop line is not required. After fog sealing, the stop line should not be repainted. If it remains visible, it will fade with the treatment and does not require additional removal or coverage effort.