QandA 10.10.24- TX FLAP FM 709(1).pdf
PDF 399 KB Posted
- Attached to
- TX FLAP FM 709(1) – Access to Navarro Mills Lake
- Solicitation number
- 6982AF23B000037
About this file
This document contains a series of Questions and Answers regarding the TX FLAP FM 709(1) federal contract opportunity. The key details are:
The project involves 3R rehabilitation to 3.8 miles of FM 709 in Texas, which provides access to the Navarro Mills Harbor Marina and Dam Road. The scope includes full depth reclamation, shoulder widening, asphalt concrete pavement, guardrail replacement, culvert work, and safety improvements. The principal work items include 7,820 CY of embankment construction, 29,000 tons of aggregate base, 49,750 SY of recycled aggregate base, 7,000 tons of asphalt concrete pavement, and various drainage components. The anticipated construction schedule is November 2024 to August 2025, with an estimated cost range between $5-10 million. The Questions and Answers address details around roadway excavation, bid items, the construction schedule, and the use of epoxy adhesive for pavement markers.
View the file
Other files
Show all 13
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
Questions and Answers during Advertisement for TX FLAP FM 709(1) Navarro Mills Lake Road
October 2, 2024
Questions Answers 1 There is no pay item listed for Roadway Excavation in the
Summary of Quantities Sheets of the plans yet there is a detail for Roadway Excavation on Sheet A9 of the plans as well as tabs in the Grading Summary on Sheet B3 of the plans for Roadway Excavation in the quantity of 12,957 CY. Is Roadway Excavation incidental to an item and I am missing the note or is it missing from the Summary of Quantities/Bid Items?
We are paying for embankment construction only.
2 On the Sam.gov solicitation it lists construction from November 2024–August 2025, but the SCRs say the expected NTP is 12/13/24 with the period of performance ending 2/12/26. Am I correct in assuming that the SCRs would govern here?
See amendment A001dated 10/07/24
3 In the SCR for the Cement Treated Aggregate Course it says, "At the option of the contractor, the existing surfacing and aggregate base may be salvaged, processed, and reused to reduce the quantity of imported crushed aggregate." Wouldn't any imported aggregate be paid in the Roadway Aggregate that has a quantity of 28,500 tons?
See pay item 30703-0000
October 10, 2024
Questions Answers 1 Could you please clarify the reasoning behind the decision to install plowable markers on this roadway?
See FP-14 Section-634, plan sheet V22, Pavement Markings
2 What are the specific reasons for requiring epoxy adhesive for the placement of these markers? TxDOT does not have an epoxy adhesive that meets the projects specifications. The standard practice in Texas involves using bituminous adhesive for markers
See FP-14 Section-634.10 on asphalt surfaces, and regular or flexible adhesive is typically utilized for the placement of raised markers. Will these standard practices be accepted for this project?
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .