Accelerated Bridge Program – Phase 1B
April 27, 2012
RFP Questions and Responses 17 to 93
Question # 17
On page B-1 of the Instructions to Proposers, the RFP states that “Each sheet shall be 8.5” by 11” and printed double-sided, unless otherwise stated below.”
However, the RFP does not state an alternate size within the section where design drawings are requested (Section B1.2 on page B-3) and we would ideally like to submit the drawings in standard size per structure, which is much larger than 8.5 by 11.
Please confirm whether or not there is a max sheet size for this section of the proposal other than 8.5 by 11.
Answer:
Design drawings shall be submitted on 11” by 17” paper. They shall be printed double-sided.
Question # 18
Appendix A section A2.3.3 provides a list of forms and certificates that proposers are required to provide. Items P and Q on this list are Form PAB and Form PEB. However, these forms appear to be due upon award of the Phase 1B contract. To clarify, are Form PAB and Form PEB required to be submitted with our proposal?
Answer:
Forms PAB and PEB are not required to be submitted with the proposal. The Best Value selected team will be required to submit them.
Question # 19
Appendix A section A2.3.3 specified that the “Project Principal” is required to sign Form CR. However, the instructions on Form CR state “ to be executed by the Proposer’s designated Project Manager.” Who is responsible for signing Form CR, the proposed Project Manager, or a Project Principal, which would most likely be the Proposer’s designated representative?
Answer:
The Project Principal.
Question # 20
Appendix B section B2.5 states in the last paragraph that “Proposer shall submit Form SCD…” The paragraph does not specify if Proposer is required to submit Form SCD in this Volume 2, Section 2 along with the Baseline Schedule in the hard copies, and/or if the Proposer is to submit Form SCD with the Baseline Schedule on the electronic copy (CD), or if the submission of Form SCD in Volume 1 (as required in Appendix A instructions) is sufficient to answer this requirement. Is Form SCD required in both Volume 1 and Volume 2 of our proposal?
Answer:
Yes. It is required in both Volumes.
Question # 21
Further explanation is needed in regards to Appendix A, Section A2.4.3, where it says Organizational Documents are required to be submitted with the proposal. Please clarify if a subcontractor is considered a “principal participant” and whether a subcontract agreement is considered an “equivalent organizational document” that needs to be submitted with the proposal.
Answer:
A subcontractor is not considered a “principal participant”.
Question # 22
The ADP plan set provided for BIN 1001830 shows that both abutments will be converted into integral abutments, encasing the existing bearings in concrete. Please confirm that is acceptable to NYSDOT and if so, would this also be applicable to BIN 1024270, BIN 1039280, and BIN 1044430?
Answer:
The plan set for BIN 1001830 is attached as guidance only. Alternate designs, including integral abutments, will be accepted as long as the design calculations support the proposed solutions and will be evaluated on a case by case basis.
Question # 23
Can you please clarify the requirements for the certified copies? Can this be a notary stamp with the words “Certified True Copy” written over it, with a signature of the Proposer’s Representative?
Answer:
Yes
Question # 24
Currently, Form FA(A) states the Proposal Validity Period is 180 days from Proposal Due Date. Shouldn’t this be changed to 90 days, per earlier verbiage in the RFP in Section 3.4.3 on page 15?
Answer:
Yes. The proposal validity period is 90 days.
Question # 25
Form KP – Key Personnel Information includes two positions (Resident Engineer & Lead Materials Testing Person) that were not included on the SOQ Matrix of Key Personnel for the original submission. Therefore, there has been a change relative to the SOQ… please explain if this is in fact considered a change relative to our SOQ submission.
Answer:
It is not a change in the SOQ submission. It is an extension of the requirements in the RFP. The bidder shall Include the requested information for those individuals also in the Proposal.
Question # 26
Section B2.3.1 indicates that 2-page resumes shall be included for key QC personnel. Table B indicates that resumes can be three pages max. Please clarify the page limit on resumes, and if resumes should only be included in Volume 2, Section 3 of the proposal, and nowhere else.
Answer:
Resumes shall be 3 pages max. Resumes shall be in Volume 2, Section 3 and Section 4. Follow specific section requirements.
Question # 27
Section B2.4.1 indicates that 2-page resumes shall be included for all personnel listed in the organization charts. Table B indicates that resumes can be three pages max. Please clarify the page limit on resumes, and if resumes should only be included in Volume 2, Section 3 of the proposal, and nowhere else.
Answer:
Resumes shall be 3 pages max. Resumes shall be in Volume 2, Section 3 and Section 4.
Question # 28
Can you please clarify if resumes are only needed for Key Personnel listed on form KP, or if they are needed for all staff listed on the Organizational Charts in Section B2.3.1 and Section B2.4.1.
Answer:
Resumes listed in Table B shall be provided.
Question # 29
There is a difference in what the Design Report and the proposal at the Paul Road Bridge, (BIN 1048600) Specifically, the Design Report has a 4’ shoulder with 2’-1” safety walk versus the proposal which says 2’ shoulder and 4’ walk.
Answer:
“Part 3 - Project Requirements”- page 57 - states “…two 4-foot shoulders. Two 2’-1” brush curbs shall be provided.”
Question # 30
Will the NYSDOT be incorporating into the D/B Agreement any provisions for the typical Item 698 Items (Steel, Fuel, Asphalt Price Adjustments)?
Answer:
No.
Question # 31
CanRt 27 be closed at night to replace main span stringers? (WZTC currently stateonly 2lanes can be takeneach way Sun-Thurs. However, wewould likeDOT to consider the traffic exitingRt 27 to Great Neck road (EB and WB) and getting right back on again on the other side of the bridge - at night, traffic should be light.
Answer:
At this point no.
Question # 32
Also - for the same bridge, there is a reference on the as-builts that approach slab info is on the highway plans; is it possible to get the relevant Highway Drawing?
Answer:
Relevant drawings have been posted.
Question # 33
DB Contract Documents - Part 3 (Project Requirements): BIN 1070110 - Rte 55 over Rte44 (Section 3.7.9): The table provided in for this bridge states that the first stage of construction is to occur when school is out and 1 lane is to be maintained on the bridge. The duration provided in the table states "3 months per stage". If the duration of the first stage when school is out is less than 3 months will the Design Builder be required to complete the stage in ashorter duration than 3 months? Please confirm which shall govern. If the school recessperiod governs please provide the dates the schools will closed.
Answer:
Three months will govern but the school recess period must be within the three month maximum period,
Question # 34:
DB Contract Documents - Part 3 (Project Requirements): BIN 1044870 - Ridge St over I-287 and BIN 1037510 - Rte 125 over 1-95 (Sections 4.2.8 and 4.2.9):
The two (2) referenced structures call for a single-slope concrete barrier with pedestrian fencing to be provided at each side of the structure. These structures also call for 5-foot wide sidewalks.
Traditionally when bridge sidewalks with pedestrian fencing is to be installed, a vertically face concrete parapet is usually specified. Please confirm that these two bridges will require single-slope concrete barrier at each fascia in lieu of vertical face concrete parapets. Please confirm that the intent to use barrier in lieu of vertical parapet is to facilitate the installation of precast construction in lieu of cast-in-place.
Answer:
The barrier as indicated is a NYSDOT requirement on this structure and can be used on precast or CIP decks.
Question # 35:
DB Contract Documents - Part 3 (Project Requirements): BIN 1070450 Rte 100C overSprain Brook Parkway (Section 4.2.10):The Required Bridge Section calls for four 12-foot lanes, two 12-foot shoulders, and a12-foot wide median. The existing bridge contains an EB turn lane to make a left ontoSprain Brook Parkway NB. Is it the owner's intent to eliminate this turn lane and replacewith a 12-foot wide median? The existing structure also contains a narrower raisedconcrete median. Is this raised median to be re-established on the new structure?
Answer:
The intent is to retain the existing roadway configuration as is. The median shall not be made wider.
Question # 36:
DB Contract Documents - Part 3 (Project Requirements):. BIN 1022240 - Rte 32 overMoodna Creek (Section 4.2.13.3A):Please clarify whether the bearing replacement scope of work includes replacement ofPin?
Answer:
Pins do not need to be replaced. Roller nests shall be removed and new bearings installed in place of the roller nests.
Question # 37:
DB Contract Documents - Part 3 (Project Requirements): BIN 1096560 - Scotchtown
Road over Route 17:Since Scotchtown Road is not a State Highway, please clarify whether we have approvalfor full closure and use oftown roads for the detour?
Answer:
Thirty days are allowed for closure as per RFP. Request for approval of use of town roads shall be coordinated with the NYSDOT and the Town. NYSDOT has met with the Town and they are aware of the closure and the detour.
Question # 38:
General Question:
The "Bridge Specific Scope of Work" provided in RFP does not always agree with the"Proposed Work" described in Project Scoping Report/Final Design Report (PSR/FDR).Please clarify which document controls. For example, for BIN 1014510 bridge, concreteabutment and wingwall repair work is included in the PSR/FDR, whereas, it is notincluded in the scope ofwork noted inthe RFP.
Answer:
“Part 3 - Project Requirements” is the controlling document.
Question # 39:
General Question:
Please clarify whether it is acceptable to use asphalt overlay with water proofing membrane on precast deck considering the following constraints/parameters noted in theRFP:
a. Precast deck shall have equal or better performance than a cast-in-placedeck
b. Limited available full or partial closure durations for bridges resulting inlimited time for curing
c. A new wearing surface and a waterproofing membrane shall be providedonly if precast deck is used (Section 4.1)
Answer:
A waterproofing membrane with an asphalt overlay shall be used on precast deck only in the NYSDOT Regions specified in Part 3 - Project Requirements.
Question # 40:
General Question:
In the ABP Phase 1B Questions and Answers, Q&A #136 stated, "The Site ManagerComputers and Networking, etc. shall be the responsibility of the Design-Builder. TheDepartment will provide the minimum standards." Please provide.
Answer:
A list will be provided as part of an Addendum.
Question # 41:
Section 5.2.1.3, BIN 1052160, Clinton Ave over Route 104 – Section D of the scope calls for “Backwall Rehabilitation” however the 8/26/11 biennial inspection report provided on the Department’s website gives a backwall rating of 6 (begin) and 5 (end). No deterioration is noted in the photos or text of the report for the backwalls.No backwall work is mentioned in the Design Report other than reconfiguring the top of the backwalls to accommodate jointless construction. Please confirm that backwall rehabilitation is truly needed at this BIN and if so please provide documentation for the limits of the deterioration on which to base our costs.
Answer:
Backwall repairs are not anticipated at this location.
Question # 42:
Section 6.2.3.3, BIN 1022880, East Delevan Ave over Route 33 – Section B and C1 of the scope call for “Pedestal Rehabilitation” and “Backwall Rehabilitation”, however the 11/7/11 inspection report provided on the Department’s website is only an interim inspection report and does not have any detailed information about the condition of the pedestals or backwall (other than a numerical rating) on which to base our reconstruction work effort. Can the Department provide the most recent biennial inspection report?
Answer:
Additional inspection reports have been posted.
Question # 43
1) In reference to the bridge design reports which identify stainless steel reinforcement is to be used for interstate, NHS and other selected highway bridges to reduce future corrosion, please confirm stainless steel reinforcement shall be utilized for the 4 region 1 bridges identified below, and also advise if required on other bridges not listed here:
1. BIN 1004249, Route 7 over I-890, Schenectady, NY
2. BIN 1006800, Route 9N over NW Bay Brook, Bolton, NY
3. BIN 1053570, Route 9N over Grove Brook, Port Henry, NY
4. BIN 4002590, Route 5 over Erie Canal, Schenectady, NY
Answer:
Stainless steel is not required to be used on any bridge in this program.
Question # 44
Will DOT provide a secure area for storing street lights that are taken down, or will the contractor be responsible for finding a storage area?
Answer:
The Contractor is responsible. R.O.W access can be obtained through NYSDOT by a Highway Work Permit. See website.
Question # 45
Please reference Section 4.1 of the contract documents for each of the Zones. Please confirm that the only zone that does not require a membrane and overlay is Zone 3. Thank you.
Answer:
This requirement is by Region, not by Zone. Please review Section 4.1 for each Region.
Question #46
For maintenance of traffic, can temporary concrete barrier be set adjacent to a travel lane or is anoffset required?
Answer:
The requirements of Section 619 of the Standard Specifications shall be adhered to.
Question #47
BIN 1040560, Route 208 over Otter Kill – No bearing work is listed in the scope of work, yet 5% ofpayment is listed for bearing work. Please clarify if bearing work is anticipated.
Answer:
An Addendum will be issued.
Bearing work is not anticipated. The 5% will be included in the demolition and removal of deck. That payment will increase from 15% to 20%.
Question #48
If existing approach guide rail is non-standard, to what extent will proposer be responsible forupgrading the approach guide rail?
Answer:
Non-standard railing shall be replaced to a distance that can be safely transitioned from the new standard rail to the existing non-standard rail to remain.
Question #49
BIN 1014510, Route 17K over Ex-NHRR – The Design Report identifies cracks in the abutment
which are to be repaired. The RFP does not include this work. Is the proposer responsible forrepairing the cracks?
Answer:
No.
Question #50
BIN 1096560, Scotchtown Road over Route 17
a. The existing structure has fencing installed along the fascias. The RFP does not indicate that anyfencing will be installed. Please clarify if fencing is to be installed.
Answer:
Please see Section 4.2.5 – Required bridge section. Pedestrian fencing shall be installed.
b. The RFP identifies a “single-faced concrete parapet” to be installed. Please clarify the parapettype.
Answer:
As stated in the RFP. See BD RC-11 for details.
Question #51
BIN 5500019, Hutchinson River Parkway (Route 907W) over Route 1 – There are existing conduitsin the concrete parapets that are empty. Do they need to be replaced?
Answer:
Yes.
Question #52
BIN 1044870, Ridge Street over I-287:
a. Has the Department obtained local approval to perform the work under a full closure?
Answer:
It should be estimated asa full closure until further notice.
b. No bearing work is listed in the scope of work, yet 5% of payment is listed for bearing work.
Please clarify if bearing work is anticipated.
Answer:
An Addendum will be issued.
Bearing work is not anticipated. The 5% will be included in the demolition and removal of deck. That payment will increase from 10% to 15%.
c. The RFP identifies a “single-slope concrete barrier with pedestrian fencing” to be installed.
Please clarify that this is the barrier type required.
Answer:
Yes it is. See BD RC-11.
Question #53
BIN 1037510, Route 125 over I-95:
a. Has the Department obtained local approval to perform the work under a full closure?
Answer:
It should be estimated as staged construction until further notice.
b. The RFP identifies a “single-slope concrete barrier with pedestrian fencing” to be installed.
Please clarify that this is the barrier type required.
Answer:
As stated in the RFP. See BD RC-11.
Question #54
Are records available indicating the thicknesses of asphalt overlays on the bridges?
Answer:
It is the Design-Build team’s responsibility to verify all information given by the Department and to visit the job site.
Question #55
Has the Department identified the type of Engineer’s Field Office it will require?
Answer:
Field offices are not required.
Question #56
Activity ID 00005, Prestart Schedule Meeting – SS with letting date as shown on table or followingaward as stated on page 6?
Answer:
Following Contract award as stated on page 6.
Question #57
Activity ID M00025, Contract Award Process – 45 days is inconsistent with May 30, 2012 date in theinstruction to proposers
Answer:
An Addendum will be issued.
The date in the Instructions to Proposers is correct.
Question #58
Activity ID 00055, Set up Engineer’s Field Office – is this for one or multiple locations?
Answer:
Field Officesare not required.
Question #59
Bridge 7 Rt. 907(Hutchinson River Pkwy) over Rt.1
1. The existing ½ barrier parapet has a fluted design on the back side. Will the new barrier parapetbe required to duplicate this?
Answer:
No.
2. The existing ½ barrier parapet angles away from the traveled lanes beyond the bridge deck,
terminating with a blunt end. Some type of end treatment or tapered end will be required.
Answer:
The design shall be in accordance with current standards and a safe transition shall be provided. This is the Engineer of Record’s responsibility
3. The existing bridge deck has been overlaid with asphalt. Is it one overlay, or multiple overlays,and what is the thickness? This bridge may have been overlaid with a new asphalt surface courseafter the 2010 inspection.
Answer:
Overlay thickness is unknown. Contractor to verify in field.
Question #60
Bridge 8 Ridge St. over I-287
1. The existing gas main is supported on hangers attached to the underside of the deck. The hangerswill need to be attached to the diaphragms. Is this our responsibility or the utility companies?
Answer:
It is recommended that these findings be revisited as our information differs. If hangers are needed, the cost shall be included in the Lump Sum bid for this bridge,