Q and A 3.3.25.pdf

HFLECO250053PR - 693C7325Q00011 QSheet1

Q&A

Q1.

I wanted to confirm whether AASHTO accreditation for specific test methods is the intended requirement. I would like to inquire if there is flexibility in this requirement for laboratories that have demonstrated expertise in conducting the required tests but do not hold formal AASHTO accreditation. The lab I am considering for this project has extensive experience performing these tests as part of various research projects, including those funded by national and state agencies. While not AASHTO-accredited, they have successfully executed similar test programs that required high precision and quality control. Would it be possible to submit documentation demonstrating the lab's qualifications, past work, and quality assurance measures in lieu of formal accreditation?

A1.

The intent is to request AASHTO R 18 accreditation for tests that offer accreditation. AASHTO R 18 accreditation ensures equipment is properly calibrated and technicians are proficient by audit and proficiency samples among several other quality initiatives, but Equipment and Proficiency is the focus here. The equipment shown in the proposal must show calibration if AASHTO R 18 is not available and evidence such as a calibration report can be considered equivalent in this study. Technician proficiency must be shown in either an AASHTO R 18 competency requirement style, or a bio demonstrating proficiency, or completion of high ratings of proficiency samples in which independent assurance/independent study samples with calculated ratings can be used. Assurance that end results are reliable is the intent of requesting accreditation and any evidence as further described above can be considered to meet the criteria.

Q2.

1- Is there a specific word or page limit for the quote submission?

2- Are there any specific requirements to highlight the qualifications of the core team and subcontractors (e.g., CVs, past project examples, letters of intent, lab facility information, etc.) and show project timeline or a quad chart?

3- Should subcontractors complete the attached representation form/provisions as part of the submission?

HFLECO250053PR - 693C7325Q00011 QSheet1

A2.

1- For the submission or quote there is no limit criteria. However, as an example the expectation would be about 1-5 pages that is clear and brief enough to cover the agreement you would like to make. Explicitly spell out how the service can meet each task on the SOW. An excel or word format may be used. The SOW may be copied with your responses after each bullet if it’s easier. Additionally, and separately, Any value added suggestions not covered in the SOW should be briefly described and priced separately.

2- The only qualification requirement is demonstrating that R 18 requirements are being met for testing purposes if it is not simply accredited. No other requirements are in the SOW. Previous experience will be taken into consideration as long as it is best value to government and meets all required needs.

3- All bidders should complete an 889 form. When the award goes out, additional information will be requested.

Q3.

1- Should we plan for three LTA conditions plus STA, or just three in total? Similarly for the alternate air voids, should we plan for 1 LTA condition plus STA, or just 1 LTA condition?

2- Please confirm rutting tests (TP 134 and T 324) to be conducted under LTA conditions.

3- When is the approximate project start date? This will help us prepare proficiency bios for the assigned team members.

4- Is the 20-hour and 40-hour PAV testing to be done on recovered binder, or will virgin binder be supplied? Can we apply the thin film method from NCHRP 09-61 to reduce the quantity of recovered binder needed?

A3.

1. SOW calls for 3 LTA levels of aging only. One additional STA can be a value-added proposition with a separate line item as optional. One alternative air void point at 1 LTA condition. Details of Va target and LTA to be detailed upon award. 2. TP 134 SSR is to be part of the suite detailed with aging levels. T 324 is separately at initial plant produced condition and at the extended aging level in the SOW. 3. As soon as possible, immediately after award. 4. On recovered binder. Yes a 12.5 gram pan for 20 hours may be used as long as it is verified by some comparison work on the PAV used that includes G*sin delta for 20 hour

12.5 gram PAV versus 40 hour PAV 50 gram pans. This should be completed prior to using the alternative. Levelness of the PAV and use of thick style pans are paramount when using the 09-61 method and this needs verified prior to use.

Sheet1