QnA 12.3.2020.pdf

Questions and Answers during Advertisement for NV FLAP 300(1) Fossil House Road

December 3, 2020

Questions Answers 1 Section 153.02 Qualifications deletes both the Full-Time and Part-Time on site CQC. What are the on-site requirements for this position and can the Superintendent also fulfill this role?

Section 153.02 of the SCR’s deleted the requirement for a Full Time QCM, but a part time QCM is still necessary. The requirements for a part time QCM are in

153.02 (a)(2) of the SCR’s on page E-24.

2 Is a Site Safety Health Officer required on-site for this project?

No separate Site Safety Health Officer is required for this project, however, the contractor is required to abide by all regulations (Including COVID regulations).

3 Subsection 108.01 of the SCRs does not list the Completion Date or Project Duration, can you provide the duration of the project?

Section 108.01 of the SCR’s, page E-16 of the Invitation for Bid, shows a contract completion date of November 13, 2021.

4 Where can we obtain water for construction activities and fire prevention?

Contractor to locate their own water source.

5 Is there a place on site that we can stockpile or spread the spoiled material?

Contractor to locate their own stockpile/staging area. There is no place available on-site.

6 Will construction personnel be allowed to use the camp sites during construction? If not, is there additional areas where contractor personnel can set up lodging?

Contractor is to set up their own lodging, for camp site use please contact Park.

7 Sheet F1 has a detail for embankment construction. When building back the small slope section in front of the wall and the embankment construction contained by the wall, will we have to follow this detail?

Having to start the slope with an 8ft bench at the toe would require a massive amount of material to be moved, stockpiled, and brought back in.

Details on Sheet F1 do not apply to the slope in front of the cantilever soldier pile wall. Embankment in front of wall shall be per Section 204.10 (c) of the Standard Specifications.

Embankment construction between the existing embankment and back of wall shall be per Sheet F1 except a keyway is not required.

8 Please see attached barrier rail detail. The plans and notes seem to reflect a cast in place concrete barrier rather than standard precast concrete barrier rail (K Rail). Please confirm this correct?

If so, can we cast the barrier rail without the standard curve that exists?

Precast concrete suppliers have these steel forms but having forms made with the curve will add additional costs to the government. One side of the barrier gets buried entirely and the other side is almost buried as well so it doesn’t seem to matter.

Precast barrier is acceptable.

Slopes on barrier face are not a concern, only barrier height.

The red lines on the barrier rail detail reflect the shape of the form we would like to use.

9 The specs call for a complete on site lab. Is this going to be required?

Will we have to do all testing including concrete breaks on site?

The actual lab can be offsite as long as Contractor can provide results in the timeframes as stated for each material and meet the requirements stated in the contract.

10 As related to the above referenced solicitation, SCR 701.01 requires Type 5 Cement in all concrete. Given the site location and availability of Type 5 cement, this is an extremely expensive criteria. Would FHWA consider use of Type 2 Cement with 20% Pozzolan in lieu of Type 5 Cement which is considered an equivalent per the Nevada Department of Transportation specification?

As related to the question below; further clarification is added based upon conversation with local ready mix vendors. Specifically, Type 5 Cement is not readily available within the United States because there are more efficient ways of controlling temperature and sulfate attack through the use of pozzolans and slag that have become widely available. As such, the majority of State DOT and/ or other Public Works Agencies specify a Type 2 Cement with pozzolan or slag.

Use Type II/V cement for all concrete.

See Amendment A002 for SCR 701.01

11 The Station limits of the Site 1, Left Side Revet Mattress/Concrete Barrier shown on Plan Sheet C2 (approximately 53+05 to 53+90) does not match the Summary on Plan Sheet B8 (52+68 to 54+21).

53+03 to 53+89 are the correct station limits. Please refer to Amendment A002.

12 On sheets A7 or C2, does the roadway width for Site 1 include the concrete barrier width? (i.e. Are the station callouts, 9.00 Lt and 9.00 Rt to the inside face of rail or outside face of rail from centerline of roadway? Is the planned roadway width for Site 1 actually 18’ minus the width of the top of barrier rail?

The roadway width for Site 1 includes the concrete barrier width (i.e. the 18’ width is from outside face to outside face of barrier) The top of the barrier should be flush with the finish grade of the roadway thus allowing the full 18’ to be utilized as traveled way.

13 Regarding Standard Specification 501.11 Sealing Joints and the Standard Drawings 501-2, it is understood that the initial green cut is 1/8”. Please provide the width for the finished sealed joints (5/16”, 3/8”, etc.)?

See the Minor Concrete Pavement Joint Sealing Details in Standard Drawing 501- 2 (bottom right of sheet). Joint width varies depending on the type of joint. Details on joint width, sealant type and sealant depth are shown in 501-2 for each type of joint (isolation, construction or sawed/formed joint)

14 If the selected contractor elects to use Welded Wire Reinforcement for the Reinforced Minor Concrete Pavement, shall it be epoxy coated per note 3 on Standard Plan sheet 501-1 or is plain non-coated acceptable?

Since there is 2-inch horizontal clearance around the slab and the dowel bars and slab reinforcement are on different vertical planes, non-coated WWR is acceptable. Tie bars, dowel bars, and other steel elements should be epoxy coated per Note 1 on Std 502-2.