Question 34 - Submitted 11/18/2008

According to your earthwork log for MN 11 Sta 7324 to Sta 7372 at sta 7337+09.00 (sheet 21 and sheet 22) there is a suitable fill volume of 13677cy. Is this correct?

Answer 34:

No that is not correct that is a volume adjustment, 13677 X 1.3(shrinkage)= 17780 CY. The 17780 CY excavated from the mainline ditches of Hwy 11 has to be used on County Hwy 18. See plan sheet - Section 11 Sheet 1.

Question 33 - Submitted 11/18/2008

Regarding the east/west hinge brgs shown on sheet no 46 of section 170. Is the bonding of the PTFE to the stainless and the bonding of the stainless to the elastomeric pad to be done in the shop or field?

Answer 33:

For both the west and east hinge bearings, there is a 1/16" PTFE plate which is first bonded to an 1/8" stainless steel plate and then to the elastomeric pad. The plan dimensions of these plates are the same as the elastomeric pad. This bonding is to be done in the shop. In addition to this, there is a stainless steel plate that is to be shop welded to the bottom of the sole plate. The dimensions of this plate are shown in the plan and elevation views on sheet 46.

Question 32 - Submitted 11/18/2008

What is the 399 Tons of Class 5 for? Bid item #018.

Answer 32:

The Class 5 is for pipe backfill. See plan sheets 20-5, 20-6, 60-5 and 60-9 for details and locations.

Question 31 - Submitted 11/18/2008

What type of bedding pad ,between masonry plate and concrete, is required for the steel bridge bearings?

Answer 31:

There is no bedding pad.

Question 30 - Submitted 11/18/2008

Bid item number 050 Riprap - Loose Rock. I see 3 riprap locations at culvert pipes. Is the rest of this quantity for the storm water treatment pond?

Answer 30:

1750 CY of Riprap is provided for the bridge work (slope protection, river pier footings, etc) see section 170 of the plans. 50 CY is provided at Station 7333+20 LT for the storm Water Pond. 11 CY is provided at Station 7328+85 RT for a pipe culvert on TH 11. 11 CY is provided at Station 526+67 LT for a pipe culvert on CR 18.

Question 29 - Submitted 11/17/2008

On sheet SP 023(08) Page 3 of 5 paragraph 7 it states that the engineer is going to stake the wick and strip drain locations. On sheet SP 035(08) Page 2 of 4 paragraph 1 it shows staking the wick and strip drain locations in the list of contractor responsibilities.

Answer 29:

The wick and strip drain locations are to be staked by the contractor.

Question 28 - Submitted 11/17/2008

Will the succesful bidder on this project be provided the GeoPak support files including design profile and alignments and design cross sections in a Trimble DC format? Will this data include special ditches, storm water retention ponds and other items not on the roadway? Will right of way monuments be set by the contractor? If so, what are their locations and how many? There appears to be no pavement marking information for layout. Is this a staking requirement by the contractor?

Answer 28:

The Department will supply Geopak support files and text files to the successful bidder. They will not be in a Trimble DC format. Any modifications to the files will have to be done by the contractor. The permanent ponds and ditch grades are shown on the cross-sections. Temporary ponds are not on the cross-sections. Right of way monuments are to be set by the contractor in accrodance with Special Provision 035(08). The Department will provide the location of the monuments to the successful bidder. The number of Monuments and Right of Way Markers is shown in the bid quantity listing. In accordance with Special Provision 035(08), the contractor shall stake the pavement marking. The pavement marking layout is detailed on Standard Drawings D-762-1, D-762-3, D-762-4, D-762-6 and the Basis of Estimate Sheet, all which can be found in the project plans.

Question 27 - Submitted 11/17/2008

Do you have the cut and fill volumes per cross section? Would it be possible to get the proposed alignment file and existing alignment file in xml? Would it be possibel to get a station, offset, elevation report for the existing and proposed x-sections in a text format?

Answer 27:

Earthwork log files have been placed on the Eplans website as of November 18. The Department will supply Geopak support files and text files to the successful bidder. Any modifications to the files will have to be done by the contractor.

Question 26 - Submitted 11/17/2008

There are no bearing details for piers 2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10,12,13,14,15,16,18,19,20,21,22 and abut 38, can we assume they are the same as the details on page 66-138.720-42?

Answer 26:

Section 170 - Sheet 94 of the plans shows that joint filler will be used under the beams at piers 2,4,6,7,9,10,12,13,15,16,18,19,21 & 22. Section 170 - Sheet 95 of the plans shows that joint filler will be used under the beams at piers 3,8,14 & 20. Section 170 - Sheet 43 of the plans shows the details for the bearings at abutment 38.

Question 25 - Submitted 11/17/2008

WE ARE EPOXY COATERS AND FABRICATORS OF REINFORCING STEEL REBAR. WE ARE WANTING TO PUT A BID FOR PROJ : AC-HPP-TIP-SS-6-066(012) PEMBINA COUNTY. WE ARE MEMBERS OF CRSI AND HAVE BEEN SINCE 2001. WE FOLLOW ASHTO M-284 AND ASTM SPECS. MY QUESTION IS : DOES MY COMPANY NEED TO BE PRE-APPROVED BY THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA BEFORE BEING ABLE TO SUPPLY MATERIAL ? IS THERE AN EXISTING LIST OF APPROVED SUPPLIERS ?

Answer 25:

Preapproval to supply material is not required. No, there is not a list of approved suppliers.

Question 24 - Submitted 11/14/2008

If a cofferdam seal is required to construct pier 32, would the additional weight of submerged seal concrete be proportionally added to the plan pile layout (replace 14 x 73 with a greater section)or would additional piles be required to distribute the extra load?

Answer 24:

Up to 710 CY of Seal Slab Concrete can be used with the existing piling as shown at pier 32. It is assumed the Seal Slab Concrete is uniformly distributed amongst the piling. If more than 710 CY of Seal Slab Concrete is used, then modifications to the piling and/or footing will be necessary. The costs of such modifications shall be the responsibility of the Contractor and included in the bid price for the project. Any modifications to the piling and/or footing will need approval from the Department. If modifications are necessary, the first possibility is to increase pile size. If this is not adequate the footing will need to be redesigned.

Question 23 - Submitted 11/13/2008

Is there a steel decking option for this bridge? It will affect how we order supports for reinforcing steel.

Answer 23:

Steel decking will not be allowed for this project.

Question 22 - Submitted 11/13/2008

Are the top and bottom bent bearings to be shop welded or field welded?

Answer 22:

All of the bearings are welded to the bent in the shop.

Question 21 - Submitted 11/13/2008

The plan shows the vertical reinforcing(dwls)on piers 3,5,8,11,14,17,20 & 23 being embedded only half way into the footing. These dwls are the full height of the piers so this application would require the contractor to suspend the entire wall in the correct position prior to pouring the footing and preventing it from moving during concrete placement. Would it be okay to drill and epoxy all of these verts in after the footing was poured? or add smaller dwls and add a splice to the verts above the footing?

Answer 21:

Drilling and epoxying the bars in will not be allowed. Using shorter bars coming out of the footing with an adequate splice length will be allowed. Using longer bars so they extend to the bottom of the footing will be allowed.

Question 20 - Submitted 11/13/2008

Is AISC certification required for the fabrication of the "Traffic Rail-Steel"?

Answer 20:

AISC certification is not required for the fabrication of the "Traffic Rail-Steel".

Question 19 - Submitted 11/12/2008

Cofferdams are required on piers 31,32 and 33 and the standard specifications require footings to be placed in the dry (602.03-A-3). Is it the designers intent that the cofferdams along with the soil materials will provide for a dry excavation or will concrete seals be required?

Answer 19:

Cofferdams are required for piers 31, 32 & 33. The design of the cofferdams is the responsibility of the contractor. Seal slabs are not required but if the contractors design requires seal slabs they could use them but the cost should be included in the bid price for the cofferdams. If the contractors design requires bedding material under the footing then the cost of that material should be included in the price bid for the cofferdams.

Question 18 - Submitted 11/12/2008

Upon review of the electronic file provided for in Bid Express, the unit of measure for item 12100100 Class I Excavation indicates it will be paid per CY but the plans indicate Lump Sum. Can this be clarified?

Answer 18:

The Lump Sum unit is correct. Addendum # 2 corrects this and has been posted to the ND eplans website as of November 13. The Expedite bid files on the ND website and the Bid Express website have been updated as well.

Question 17 - Submitted 11/12/2008

Note 107 on sheet 66-138.720-3 indicates the presence of hazardous material on the existing structure in the form of lead-based paint. Will the steel containing the lead based paint require encapsulation prior to removal of the structure?

Answer 17:

Please see SP 037(08) Permits and Environmental Considerations, Section II.B Regulated Materials, regarding the procedures for addressing lead paint, including encapsulation. This SP is part of Addendum # 2, available on the eplans website.

Question 16 - Submitted 11/10/2008

For the installation of the "Traffic Rail-Steel" is it correct to use Laborers, Group 1, $14.72/hour for the North Dakota portian of the project and Common Laborer, code #101, $27.44/hour for the Minnesota portian of the project?

Answer 16:

Yes, Group 1 Laborers can be used on the North Dakota portion of the project and the Contractor can choose either Labor code 101 (Laborer Common) or Labor Code 102 (Laborer Skilled) on the Minnesota portion of the project for the work in question. The hourly wage rates listed in the question are not correct. Updated wage rates for both ND and MN are contained in Addendum # 2. Note that Addendum # 2 was issued on November 13 and is available on the ND eplans website.

Question 15 - Submitted 11/10/2008

Finger Joints - Is AISC certification required for the fabrication of the finger joints and finger joint support beam? If so - is AISC Simple Bridge sufficient? Bearings - Is AISC certification required for the fabrication of the bearings? If so - is AISC Simple Bridge sufficient?

Answer 15:

AISC certification is not required for the fabrication of the finger joints and finger joint support beam. AISC certification is not required for the fabrication of the bearings.

Question 14 - Submitted 11/10/2008

The project proposal does not appear to contain the most recent prevailing wages for Highway Heavy Region Number: 2 http://workplace.doli.state.mn.us/prevwage/highway_data.php?region=02

Answer 14:

Addendum # 2 has been posted to the website as of November 13. Addendum # 2 contains the updated wage rates for both Minnesota and North Dakota.

Question 13 - Submitted 11/6/2008

In both questions 8 and 9 it is stated the second Type C Lab is for the Contractors Quality Control during bituminous paving. However, in section 4.6 of SP 034(08) it states that the contractor is not required to perform Quality Control on bituminous pavement. Please clarify.

Answer 13:

Section 4.6 of Special Provision 034(08) Quality Control/ Quality Assurance is in error. The Contractor shall provide Quality Control of the hot bituminous pavement as specified elsewhere.

Question 12 - Submitted 11/6/2008

In section 4.5 of SP 034(08) it states the contractor shall provide inspection and approval of all welds. What type of inspection will be required?

Answer 12:

The Contractor will not have to provide inspection or approval of piling welds.

Question 11 - Submitted 11/6/2008

In the heading of section 4.3 of SP 034(08) it states (Concrete Alternate) in parentheses. Is there an alternate on this project?

Answer 11:

No, there is not an alternate on this project. Actually, sections 4.3 and 4.4 of Special Provision 034(08) Quality Control/Qualtiy Assurance can be disregarded, since neither section 4.3 or 4.4 apply to this project.

Question 10 - Submitted 11/5/2008

Do North Dakota prevailing wages govern work on the North Dakota portion of the project & Minnesota prevailing wages govern work on the Minnesota portion of the project?

Answer 10:

Yes. Pursuant to the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts (DBRA), the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry Prevailing Wages for State Funded Construction Projects (Highway and Heavy Prevailing Wage) and the Federally Funded Construction Contracts Special Provisions Division A - Labor (February 1, 2006), contained in the contract proposal, apply only to that portion of the project located within the boundaries of the State of Minnesota up to and including pier 32. The Labor Rates From U. S. Department of Labor (Decision No. ND20080002), contained in the contract proposal, apply only to that portion of the project located within the boundaries of the State of North Dakota up to pier 32. All payroll forms and related Statements of Compliance must be submitted to the North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT), using the format required by NDDOT. Should a wage dispute arise on the Minnesota portion of the project, the contractor will be asked to provide the additional information required under the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MNDOT’s) labor compliance program. The provisions of Section XI, “Subcontracting Part of This Contract,” of the February 1, 2006, special provision are deleted; and the provisions of the North Dakota Standard Specifications for Construction regarding subcontract provisions are inserted therein.

Question 9 - Submitted 11/5/2008

The proposal calls for 1 each Type B Field Lab & 2 each Type C Field Labs. I assume the Type B lab will be onsite for concrete & soil testing. The standard spec's states the Type C lab is to be located at the asphalt plant for testing. What is the intent of the second Type C lab?

Answer 9:

See Standard Specification 410.04; one Type C Field Lab is for the Engineer and the other Type C Field Lab is for the Contractors Quality Control during Hot Bituminous Pavement Superpave production.

Question 8 - Submitted 11/3/2008

Will the Field Labs Type B & C be available for use by both the contractors Quality Control team, and the Departments Quality Assurance team.

Answer 8:

The bid quantity for the Type B Field Laboratory is 1 Each. In accordance with Standard Specification 706.02, the Type B Field Lab is for the exclusive use of the Engineer. The bid quantity for the Type C Field Laboratory is 2 Each. In accordance with Standard Specification 410.04, one Type C Field Lab is for the Engineer and the other Type C Field Lab is for the Contractors Quality Control during Superpave production. Therefore, the Type B Field Lab will not be available for the Contractor's Quality Control team. The Contractor shall supply their own facility for the Contractor's quality control work; the costs of which shall not be paid for separately, but shall be included in payments for other items (with the exception that the Contractor provides a Type C lab for for their own QC work during Superpave production as described above).

Question 7 - Submitted 11/3/2008

The Bent Ice Nose angles are called out to be galvinized per notes sheet 4 under Spec. No. 616. However the nose angles at Bents 24 - 29 and 35 - 37 are welded to the steel columns. Should these angles be considered exposed bent column steel and painted or should that column and angle be galvinized?

Answer 7:

The angles welded to the bents shall be considered exposed bent column steel and painted.

Question 6 - Submitted 11/3/2008

Plan Sheet 170-4 Piling Notes - In no case shall the ram weight be less than 7,900 pounds. Is that note referring to the 14X102 pile section only?

Answer 6:

The second 622 PILING plan note in Section 170, Sheet No. 4 shall be used for the driving of the HP14X102 pile. This formula can also be used for the driving of the HP14X73 pile or as an alternative the following formula can be used for the HP14X73 pile: The HP14X73 piling shall be driven by a steam, air, or diesel hammer having a rated energy and ram weight not less than 147,372 ft*lb*tons as computed by the formula W(E-18,572)+1.587E, where W is the weight of ram in tons and E is the rated energy as allowed in the Standard Specifications. In no case shall the ram weight be less than 6600 pounds.

Question 5 - Submitted 10/30/2008

how can I purchase plans and specs. This site is new to me

Answer 5:

The Bidders Proposal, Plans and other related bid documents are available on the NDDOT website free of charge. The documents are in a pdf format and can be viewed or printed. Just go to our eplans webpage and find the project you are interested in. Here is a link to the webpage: http://www.dot.nd.gov/dotnet2/eplans/default.aspx The Standard Specifications are available on our website also, or you may purchase the hard cover spec book. Information regarding the spec book is available at http://www.dot.nd.gov/dotnet/supplspecs/standardspecs.aspx You may also want to check out this webpage for other general information regarding NDDOT bid openings... http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidinfo.htm

Question 4 - Submitted 10/28/2008

CAN I USE ALUMINUM FLAP GATES THAT WILL MOUNT DIRECTLY TO HDPE PIPE CULVERTS? THESE FLAP GATES WILL MEET THE HEAD SPECIFICATION.

Answer 4:

An aluminum flap gate that meets the head specification is acceptable.

Question 3 - Submitted 10/27/2008

THE FLAP GATES ON PLAN SHEET 002 ARE MARKED 36" ON THE BID FORM ITEM 067 THEY ARE MARKED AS 30" I JUST WISH TO CLARIFY.

Answer 3:

The 36" Flap Gate shown in the plans is correct. The 30" flap gate shown in the Bidders Proposal is incorrect. The Department will issue an addendum correcting the Bidders Proposal. Addendum # 1 addresses this question.

Question 2 - Submitted 10/23/2008

Prevailing wages for ND and MN appear in the proposal. This is ND prevailing wage project correct.

Answer 2:

No, this is not just a North Dakota prevailing wage rate project. Pursuant to the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts (DBRA), the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry Prevailing Wages for State Funded Construction Projects (Highway and Heavy Prevailing Wage) and the Federally Funded Construction Contracts Special Provisions Division A - Labor (February 1, 2006), contained in the contract proposal, apply only to that portion of the project located within the boundaries of the State of Minnesota up to and including pier 32. The Labor Rates From U. S. Department of Labor (Decision No. ND20080002), contained in the contract proposal, apply only to that portion of the project located within the boundaries of the State of North Dakota up to pier 32. All payroll forms and related Statements of Compliance must be submitted to the North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT), using the format required by NDDOT. Should a wage dispute arise on the Minnesota portion of the project, the contractor will be asked to provide the additional information required under the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MNDOT’s) labor compliance program. The provisions of Section XI, “Subcontracting Part of This Contract,” of the February 1, 2006, special provision are deleted; and the provisions of the North Dakota Standard Specifications for Construction regarding subcontract provisions are inserted therein.

Question 1 - Submitted 10/17/2008

Plan Sheet 130-001 shows 2"Superpave FAA 43 from the finished shoulder to behind the guardrail. This quantity does not appear on the Basis of Estiamte (Plan Sheet 10-001), Typical Sections (Plan Sheets 030-002 & 030-003), nor is it included in the total plan quantity of 12,344 ton. Is this incidental to some item or is this an error?

Answer 1:

The Superpave hot bituminous pavement at the guardrail locations is not incidental. The Department will issue an addendum correcting the quantities and basis of estimate for Superpave and Asphalt Cement. Addendum # 1 addresses this question.