QA_01-18-2022.pdf
PDF 120 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 69056721R000015
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amendment A005.pdf | ||
| QA_01-12-2022.pdf | ||
| QA_01-13-2022.pdf | ||
| Amendment A004.pdf | ||
| QA_01-11-2022.pdf | ||
| QA_01-10-2022.pdf | ||
| Amendment A003.pdf | ||
| QA_01-07-2022.pdf | ||
| QA_01-05-2022.pdf | ||
| QA_01-03-2022.pdf | ||
| Amendment A002.pdf | ||
| Amendment A001.pdf | ||
| FLH Bridge oversized or overload vehicle permit request form Oct 2018.pdf | ||
| SD NPS PP BADL 2020(1)_PLANS_FINAL_signed.pdf | ||
| RFP SD NPS PP.pdf | ||
| BADL_C6_Final_Report.pdf |
Show all 16
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
SD NPS PP BADL 2020(1)
Pavement Preservation Badlands
# General Technical Question Answer
Date
1 X Can you please clarify Bid submittal deadline time. On Sheet A‐3 when it references local time, is that the Project Sites time, or bid turn in address time. Both locations are in 2 different time zones.
Proposals are due by 1300 PST on the date shown on Page A‐3, in Box 13a. This clarification will be made under Amendment A002. 1/3/22
2 X
A Local Contractor stated there’s a contract (Replace Deteriorated Curbing and Walkways in Parking Lots for Visitor Safety PMIS 245411) out for work in the park to replace timber curbing and walkways in several parking lots. Is this other contract going to interfere with the pavement preservation?
See FAR Clause 52.236‐8 on Page C‐102, and bid accordingly.
1/5/22
3 X Do we have to deal with Pine Ridge Indian Reservation? Nothing is mentioned in the bid documents.All coordination with Tribes will be conducted by National Park Service. Contractor will direct all issues through CO 1/6/21
4 X South Dakota Department of Transportation material specifications, please elaborate what “Medium gradation (3/8‐inches maximum)” is? SDDOT has several gradations with 3/8‐inch maximum, is it Type 1 A or B, Type 2 A, B or C?
This will be addressed under Amendment A003.
1/7/21
5 X
Aggregate in South Dakota is not compatible with cationic emulsions, In the SCR’s it says “South Dakota Department of Transportation material specifications for polymer asphaltic emulsion PMCRS‐ 2h”, there are no standard specifications for PMCRS‐2h in the SDDOT standard specifications.
This will be addressed under Amendment A003.
1/7/21
6 X Is an MTV (material transfer vehicle) or Shuttle Buggy “really” needed on the 4,000 TN of Hotmix? An MTV according to FP‐14 401.05(b) will not be required.
1/7/21
7 X Need to clarify the Hotmix if it can be of a SDDOT (local) variety, a Marshall Design, w/Neat or a Modified AC.
See FP‐14 Subsection 403.02.
1/7/21
8 X
I was wondering if there’s going to be another amendment due to the questions I submitted on January 4, 2022. The reason I’m asking is because I must send our bid package via Fedex Express today by 3:00 PM over to you guys so it gets there in time. Please let me know and thank you.
We will issue an Amendment A003 once it is finalized and this amendment will be extending the proposal due date.
1/7/21
9 x Do the limited work hours identified in Subsection 108(d) also apply to ancillary work activities ‐ e.g.
temporary striping?
Yes, please bid accordingly 1/10/22
10 X
This existing contract (Replace Deteriorated Curbing and Walkways in Parking Lots for Visitor Safety PMIS 245411) sounds to be of significant duration and within most locations within this project’s work areas. This new light on the project will significantly change the required work schedule, production rates and efforts required of the successful contractor to not only complete the work but to also complete it on time. IF the contractors do not know the what’s, where’s, when’s and how’s of this current contract, will the FHWA compensate the contractor of this contract with a change order, bid item for delays, or completion date adjustment (some type of equitable adjustment for the unknowns). This information should have been provided in the original plans and specs!
These concerns will be addressed under Amendment A004.
1/11/22
Check General or Technical
11 X
Since part of the contract work is on the Pine Ridge Reservation, does the contractor need to negotiate directly with the Tribe on required:
‐Work permits for its employees
‐TERO TAX
‐Contractor’s License for working on the Reserva on ‐TERO labor nego a ons for hiring tribal members The answer to question #3 sounds as if this is not something the prime contractor will need to address. In other words, there are no associated actions/costs required of the prime contractor related to the Pine Ridge Reservation, for this contract. The owner/CO has & will addressed all measures required for the work to occur directly. Is this an accurate assessment to that answer?
Yes. All coordination with Tribes will be conducted by National Park Service. Contractor will direct all issues through CO.”
1/12/22
12 X Will the prime contractor be able to utilize any (not all) of the parking areas (922, 919, 918, 917) for staging or stockpiling materials for the Route 0010AZ Loop Chip seal work (completion date of 7/1/22)?
See 105.04 ‐ Staging of materials within Parking Areas will only be allowed as approved by the CO. 1/12/22
13 X
Regarding Section 403. Asphalt meeting the requirements of SCR 403.02(a) for Type I does not exist in the state of South Dakota, as there are no recognized 75 gyration mixes. A SCR 403.02(b) Type II mix would be more appropriate. For the overlay, a SDDOT mix for this type of work we would see a Class E Type I mix using PG 64‐34 AC (Section 321 South Dakota Standard Specifications for Roads and Bridges, 2015 Edition), which is commonly used on state highways in the surrounding area.
Asphalt for the patching mix could use a PG 64‐28 due to workability issues. Would this be acceptable?
This will be addressed under Amendment A005. 1/12/22
14 X
Regarding Section 703. Chip seals in for this type of project would typically use a SDDOT Type 2A Chip (Section 881 South Dakota Standard Specifications for Roads and Bridges, 2015 Edition). Unlike the Type 1A chip, there is a crushed face requirement. The local Type 2A Limestone chips are 100% w/2 or more crushed faces. Would This be acceptable?
This will be addressed under Amendment A005.
1/12/22
15 X
Is it your intent to specify only PG 64‐34 asphalt for this project? If this is the case, you are eliminating local small businesses from bidding the production of the asphalt. There are local small businesses that are producing SD DOT Class E Type 1 mixes with PG 64‐28 (a modified oil). Please clarify.
Yes. Please bid accordingly.
1/18/22
16 X
Contract Clause 52.236‐1 specifies that “The MATOC Holder Contractor Shall perform on the Site, and with its own organization, work equivalent to at least twenty five (25) percent of the total amount of work to be performed under the contract.” Is this a requirement when bidding the project?
Yes. Please bid accordingly.
1/18/22
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .