Please Note: If this is the first time accessing our system on our new web site, you will be required to reset your password.
| Date Asked: 12/06/2017 | Date Answered: 12/07/2017 |
| Poster: Anthony Mesiti | Company: Cardi Corporation |
|
Question:
Relocations of the utilities on hartford ave. Please provide which utility poles the relocation starts and ends. |
|
|
Answer:
This is to be determined by the final design of the DB team. |
|
| Date Asked: 12/06/2017 | Date Answered: 12/07/2017 |
| Poster: Anthony Mesiti | Company: Cardi Corporation |
|
Question:
The construction of the new backwalls. Is the contractor to assume to drill and grout new rebar in the abutments or retain the existing rebar. |
|
|
Answer:
This is up to the DB teams final proposed design and calculations. |
|
| Date Asked: 12/05/2017 | Date Answered: 12/06/2017 |
| Poster: Patricia Teeter | Company: Pare Corporation |
|
Question:
Section 4.7 of the Part A Instructions list the requirement for an Executive Summary. However, this is not included in the Technical Proposal organization list on pages 12-13 (under Section 4.2). Is the Executive Summary part of the 30-page limit? |
|
|
Answer:
The executive summary is not included in the 30-page limit. The executive summary shall not exceed two pages. |
|
| Date Asked: 12/04/2017 | Date Answered: 12/05/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Please confirm that it is acceptable to include only an acknowledgement statement that we received the RFP and all addenda, rather than including the RFP and all addenda, in the technical proposal. This has been the guidance for other recent D-B proposals. |
|
|
Answer:
This is acceptable. |
|
| Date Asked: 12/04/2017 | Date Answered: 12/06/2017 |
| Poster: Anthony Mesiti | Company: Cardi Corporation |
|
Question:
SINCE THE ANALYZING THE STRENGTH OF THE PIERS CAN'T BE PERFORMED AT BID TIME AND WILL BE DONE DURING THE DESIGN PROCESS. PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD CARRY IN HIS BID, REPLACING THE PIERS OR PROVIDING AN IN-FILL WALL BEWTEEN THE EXISTING PIERS. THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE IN COST BETWEEN THE TWO OPTIONS. |
|
|
Answer:
It is the responsibility of the design-build team to evaluate the piers and include their evaluation in the technical and cost proposals. |
|
| Date Asked: 12/04/2017 | Date Answered: 12/06/2017 |
| Poster: Anthony Mesiti | Company: Cardi Corporation |
|
Question:
PLEASE CLARIFY WHICH UTILITIES ARE IN THE 3" CONDUITS HANGING UNDER THE BRIDGES AS SHOWN ON SHEET 26, 37, AND 42. |
|
|
Answer:
These service RIDOT highway lighting. |
|
| Date Asked: 12/04/2017 | Date Answered: 12/06/2017 |
| Poster: Anthony Mesiti | Company: Cardi Corporation |
|
Question:
PLEASE CLARIFY WHICH ITEMS OF WORK ARE CARRIED ON ITEMS C-12 AND C-13 SINCE THE DEMO AND ROADWAY FILL HAVE THEIR OWN ITEMS. |
|
|
Answer:
The cost of substructure items may be included under items C-5 and C-6 entirely or may be split between these items and items C-12 and C-13 at the discretion of the proposer. |
|
| Date Asked: 12/04/2017 | Date Answered: 12/06/2017 |
| Poster: Anthony Mesiti | Company: Cardi Corporation |
|
Question:
PLEASE CLARIFY THAT TEMPORARY SIGNAL IS REQUIRED ON RT 6 AS SHOWN ON SHEET 122. |
|
|
Answer:
The temporary traffic control signal is required. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/30/2017 | Date Answered: 12/01/2017 |
| Poster: Dan Kelley | Company: Aetna Bridge Company |
|
Question:
Part B of the Technical Requirements, Section 2.4.3, states the structural steel shall be metalized and painted. BTC plan sheet 7, Structural Steel note 12 states the structural steel shall be prepared and painted in accordance with RIDOT standard specifications. Please clarify the required finish for the structural steel. |
|
|
Answer:
The steel shall be metalized and painted as specified in the RFP part b. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/29/2017 | Date Answered: 12/04/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
There is a three-phase primary riser on a pole between the Hartford Ave (6A). NGrid Electric does not know who owns the service or what it serves, but they suspect it is a RIDOT service. Can you confirm what this service or who owns it? |
|
|
Answer:
The primary riser located on Harford ave E. bound at the 295 S. overpass feeds the transformer for the RIDOT lighting cabinets on 295 S access rd. near the route 6 State salt shed. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/27/2017 | Date Answered: 11/28/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Please confirm that independent QC at the structural steel fabrication plant is not required by the D-B Team and that the internal QC performed by the fabricator as required per their AISC certification is the limit of what is required by the D-B Team. |
|
|
Answer:
RIDOT will have independent QC at the plant in addition to the plant's own QC program. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/27/2017 | Date Answered: 12/01/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Please confirm what utilities are located in the conduits in the bridge parapets. Please confirm if these can be temporarily disconnected and for how long. |
|
|
Answer:
Utilities in the conduits that are located within the bridge parapets are electrical service for highway lighting. Temporary service shall be provided to keep the highway lighting operational at all times. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/27/2017 | Date Answered: 11/30/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Please confirm that the conduits and wires for the new tolling structures that are to be relocated on the existing bridges and then relocated under ground for bridges 73601 and 73621 can be temporarily disconnected to temporary and permanent relocation work, since there may not be slack or correct alignment for new locations. |
|
|
Answer:
The tolling contractor has been advised that sufficient slack shall be provided to allow relocation to the new conduits and to suit temporary support conditions. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/27/2017 | Date Answered: 11/30/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
RFP Part B, section 2.15.2 states that the overhead power lines that pass over Hartford Ave Bridges are to remain in place and shielding is to be used. Per OSHA, 1926.1408(d)(1) No part of the equipment, load line, or load (including rigging and lifting accessories) is allowed below a power line unless the employer has confirmed that the utility owner/operator has deenergized and (at the worksite) visibly grounded the power line. Please confirm that these power lines can be deenergized for structural steel erection and that cost to deenergize will be paid on utility force account by RIDOT. |
|
|
Answer:
This shall be coordinated between the contractor and the utility company. If there are costs associated with de-energizing the lines this will be paid for by the State under a utility force account. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/27/2017 | Date Answered: 11/30/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
RFP part P section 2.15.2 states that it's the D-B Team's responsibility for installing shields on overhead wires. This is typically the utility company's work. Please confirm that this work would be paid by the State on utility force account. |
|
|
Answer:
If there is a need for shielding the overhead wires and there is a cost associated with this work, it shall be arranged by the contractor and paid by the State under a utility force account. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/27/2017 | Date Answered: 11/27/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Are there liquidated damages for failure to complete on time? |
|
|
Answer:
Yes, this will be clarified by addendum. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/22/2017 | Date Answered: 11/22/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Price Proposal Item D-1 “Preliminary Engineering” does not appear to be defined. Given that the first submission for this project is at the 75% level, please consider deleting this item D-1, or providing a definition for it. |
|
|
Answer:
The Design Build teams can assign zero value to items that they deem are unnecessary. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/21/2017 | Date Answered: 11/21/2017 |
| Poster: Robert Wright | Company: AECOM |
|
Question:
Can the shoulders on Route 6 be permanently reduced? |
|
|
Answer:
While the shoulder widths are wider than required for traffic purposes, they are used by RIDOT maintenance vehicles and should be maintained at their current widths. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/20/2017 | Date Answered: 11/21/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Due to the considerable amount of preliminary analysis and proposal preparation along with the fact that their are open questions on this project, please consider a 2-3 week delay for this proposal and price submission deadline. |
|
|
Answer:
The deadlines for the project will not be postponed. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/17/2017 | Date Answered: 11/21/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
If a proposer shows a completion date later than that presented in the RFP, will the proposed completion date be regarded as the contractual completion date (as has been clarified on another D-B forum)? |
|
|
Answer:
Milestone dates submitted by the design build teams will be considered contractual milestone dates if that team is selected. Please note, the dates submitted by the design build teams, and how they relate to the proposed dates in the RFP documents, will be considered when scoring the proposal. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/17/2017 | Date Answered: 11/21/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Part B, pg 11/30 says “The existing bridge piers will require modifications to accommodate the proposed superstructure. These modifications include either strengthening by providing an in-fill wall between the existing pier columns or by replacing the pier.” Please confirm that RIDOT has performed an analysis to show that the in-fill option shown on the BTC plans is a solution that will satisfy the requirements of the AASHTO specifications for Bridges 737 and 757, and that the inclusion of the replacement option is merely as a cost and schedule consideration by the DB Team. |
|
|
Answer:
RIDOT has not performed an analysis to show that the in-fill option will satisfy the requirements of the AASHTO specifications. The analysis and design is the responsibility of the D/B team. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/17/2017 | Date Answered: 12/01/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
We understand that Bridges 737 and 757 were modified in the past 15 years for seismic retrofits, new bearings, etc., and that the existing plans provided by RIDOT (Bridge 757 As-Built Plans.pdf and Bridge 737 As-Built Plans.pdf) do not fully represent the as-built conditions. Please confirm, and provide all of the existing information representing the current conditions. |
|
|
Answer:
Contract documents from RIC 2005-CH-047 will be provided by addendum. These are also available in the plan room at RIDOT. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/15/2017 | Date Answered: 11/21/2017 |
| Poster: Robert Wright | Company: AECOM |
|
Question:
Can the shoulder widths on Route 6 be reduced? |
|
|
Answer:
Please clarify the question. Are you asking under a temporary condition or permanently? |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
It appears that the existing bridges have underbridge lighting. Will lighting be required under the new structures? This is not addressed on the BTC drawings. |
|
|
Answer:
Yes, underbridge lighting shall be included. The BTC documents shall be updated by addendum. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
For Bridge No. 736 phasing, 6” minimum is detailed between the back of the temporary precast barrier and the 1.5 to 1 sloped embankment. Please confirm that this barrier offset and slope are acceptable as detailed. |
|
|
Answer:
The 6" dimension is for reference only. The final determination of an appropriate offset is the responsibility of the Design-Build team. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/15/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Part B, Section 2.3.1, under the list of work items, it states, “Installation of new overhead sign supports adjacent to the bridges.” No information on locations or type of supports is provided in the BTC plans. Please provide the necessary information. Also, clarify whether new signs will need to be fabricated for the supports or if it is the intent that existing signs will be relocated onto the new supports. |
|
|
Answer:
The intent is to relocate and replace the two signs on bridge 073701 (“Freeway Ends 800 Feet” and “295 South Warwick”) and the one sign on 075721 (“295 North, Woonsocket, No Attleboro, Next Left). The signs shall be installed on appropriate overhead sign supports located 25-50 ft. in advance of each bridge. The design, fabrication, and installation of the supports and signs shall be performed by the DB team. The Legend and size of the signs shall match the existing signs. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Part B, Section 1.0, under construction requirements for work on Bridge No. 736, the last sentence regarding the Route 6 Westbound ramp appears to be incomplete. Please clarify. |
|
|
Answer:
This sentence should read "…ramp to I-295 Southbound may be closed on weekend periods only during Stage 4 and Stage 5 for removal of Bridge 73621." |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
5. Sheets 80 through 96 of the BTC drawings show detailed drawings for improvements on Hartford Avenue by Green International Affiliates and BETA Group; but this work is not mentioned in the scope other than in Part B, Section 2.3.2, it states “The limits of roadway work…shall be as shown on the BTC Plans”. Is any further design required for these improvements or is the D/B just supposed to implement the work as shown. If so, who is the Engineer of Record? |
|
|
Answer:
The D/B team is responsible for the design and construction of the roadway reconstruction depicted on the plans prepared by Green International Affiliates and BETA Group. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
How is the existing drainage under Bridge No. 736 and runoff to be addressed for the final embankment condition? The BTC plans do not seem to address this. |
|
|
Answer:
The BTC plans address concepts for drainage of this area on the Drainage General Plan Sheet 4, included in the original plans and revised under Addendum No. 1. The final design and construction of drainage for this area is to be completed by the D/B team. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
In Part B, Section 2.4.4.1(d), it is stated that seismic analysis shall conform to Article 3.6 of the Bridge Manual and that the bridges are “critical”. Per this section of the Bridge Manual, a Multimode Spectral Method of analysis is required. Per Part B, Section 2.4.5.1(g), the piers will need to be modified or replaced to satisfy the AASHTO LRFD EEI load combination. Please confirm that analysis of the abutments for this loading is not required as stated in the next paragraph of this section. |
|
|
Answer:
The bridges have been evaluated for the AASHTO LRFD EEI load combination and it was determined that the abutments are satisfactory for this load condition. The D/B team shall evaluate and modify the piers as appropriate and shall evaluate the geometric requirements of the abutment design. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Is the design deflection criteria based on 125% of the HL-93 truck, and the combination of 33% of the HL-93 truck and the design lane load, per the RIDOT LRFD Bridge Design Manual? |
|
|
Answer:
Yes. Note that the live load deflection criteria in Section 2.4.4.1 is L/800. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/07/2017 | Date Answered: 11/14/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
1. Part B, Section 2.17.1, last paragraph, states that the D/B will revise and modify the plans and deliver the revised submittal to RIDOT. Does this mean that there will be multiple submittals for each scheduled submission or is the intent to incorporate the comments into the next scheduled submission? |
|
|
Answer:
It is the intent that minor, or straightforward, comments shall be addressed and submitted with the next scheduled submittal. However, major comments or comments that may affect multiple parts of the project shall be addressed and resubmitted for approval of the response prior to the next scheduled submission. |
|
| Date Asked: 11/06/2017 | Date Answered: 11/15/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
The RIDOT response to the 10/30/2017 question regarding “total girder reactions” says “changes to the BTC will require analysis and evaluation by the D/B Team”, and Part B page 11/30 says “The existing abutments are deemed satisfactory for reuse with the BTC. No additional analysis or evaluation of the existing abutments is required unless changes are made to the BTC.” It is not possible for bidders to know whether or not we are changing the BTC without knowing what girder sizes or reactions are represented in the BTC. Please provide. |
|
|
Answer:
This information will be provided in the next addendum. |
|
| Date Asked: 10/30/2017 | Date Answered: 10/31/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Will the required forms be updated to specify the correct project? Schedule of participation and DBE Letter of Intent specify Oxford St. |
|
|
Answer:
These forms will be updated by addendum. |
|
| Date Asked: 10/27/2017 | Date Answered: 10/30/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Due to the large amount of design-build and other projects bidding, would it be possible to push this submission date until after the holidays? |
|
|
Answer:
There will be no modification to the schedule as shown in the RFP documents. |
|
| Date Asked: 10/20/2017 | Date Answered: 10/30/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Pages 11 and 12 of 30 of Part B of the RFP state that “Examples of changes to the BTC that will require analysis and evaluation of the existing abutments by the D/B Team are as follows… The total girder reactions for the AASHTO LRFD Strength I Load Combination exceed the reactions depicted in the Geotechnical Reports by 10% or more.” However, there are no reactions in the Geotechnical Reports. Please provide. |
|
|
Answer:
The existing abutments are adequate for the BTC concept as stated in the RFP docuements. Changes to the BTC will require analysis and evaluation by the D/B Team. The foundation factored bearing resistances are indicated on the BTC drawings. The bullet "The total girder reactions..." does not apply and is deleted from the RFP document in Addendum No. 2. |
|
| Date Asked: 10/05/2017 | Date Answered: 10/05/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
The requirement for the Construction QC Manager to be a PE was removed in previous design-build RFP (2017-DB-018). For 2017-DB-027, the Construction QC Manager is not required to be a PE, but must have a BSCE and 5 yrs materials oversight experience. Please consider changing the requirements for this RFP to be in line with these other similar projects. |
|
|
Answer:
This will be changed by addendum. |
|
| Date Asked: 10/03/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Regarding key personnel required: is it acceptable for one person to fill multiple roles (i.e. Construction Manager and Construction Quality Control Manager) if this is supported by out QC plan? |
|
|
Answer:
The DB Team may propose dual roles. However, quality control activities should not be performed by personnel that are responsible for actual design/construction production. Addendum to follow. |
|
| Date Asked: 10/03/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
The minimum key personnel listing in the RFP requires two full time supervisory personnel on site 100% of the time, the Construction Manager and the Construction Quality Control Manager. Additionally, a Construction Superintendent is required, who would need to be on site a significant amount of time, regardless of the RFP requirements. These personnel requirements seem excessive for the relatively straight forward scope of the construction portion of this project and the costs for all these personnel would need to be carried in the bid price. Please confirm the RFP requirement for time on project for these individuals. Is it acceptable for one person to fill multiple roles (i.e. Construction Manager and Construction Quality Control Manager) if this is supported by out QC plan? |
|
|
Answer:
The Construction QC Manager does not need to be on site full time. They would be on site on an as needed basis to perform periodic inspections and formal QC checks. The DB Team may propose dual roles. However, quality control activities should not be performed by personnel that are responsible for actual design/construction production. Addendum to follow. |
|
| Date Asked: 09/29/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
On the Price Proposal Form, lines C-12 and C-13 appear to be unnecessary. Since there is no associated substructure modifications and repair, with these bridges, should these lines be removed? |
|
|
Answer:
Lines C-12 and C-13 will remain. The Design Build teams can assign zero value to items that they deem are unnecessary. |
|
| Date Asked: 09/29/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
For technical plans where the concept is to remain unchanged from the BTC plans, is it acceptable to either reference or include copies of the BTC plans in the technical proposal or is it required to re-draft these plans? |
|
|
Answer:
The Design Build Team can submit whatever they feel is suitable, as long as it meets the requirements outlined in the RFP. |
|
| Date Asked: 09/29/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
The RFP requires the Construction QC Manager to be be a licensed P.E. , minimum 5 years direct oversight of materials sampling and testing activities and must be on the project site for the duration of construction operations. These requirements seem to be excessive. Most QC personnel who are responsible for overseeing materials sampling and testing are not licensed PE's. It's more typical and to find QC supervisory personnel with appropriate NETTCP certifications and a certain number of years of performing in this capacity in a supervisory manner. Please consider changing the QC manager requirements to a more appropriate level for this project. |
|
|
Answer:
The QC personnel who are responsible for material sampling and testing shall be certified under the appropriate NETTCP requirements as appropriate. This function shall be under the review and control of a Construction QC Manager who is a licensed Professional Engineer in accordance with the RFP. |
|
| Date Asked: 09/29/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Will the D-B contractor be responsible for providing off-site structrual steel fabrication QC services? |
|
|
Answer:
Yes, the DB contractor will be responsible for providing QC services for off-site structural steel fabrication. Reports should be submitted to the Department for record. |
|
| Date Asked: 09/29/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Which of the gantry locations will require this D-B contractor to design, furnish and install ans subsequently remove temporary support poles/structures. |
|
|
Answer:
This project falls within Toll Gantry Location 8 only. Revised plans will be provided showing only location 8 and the details of the gantry system at this location only. All tolling infrastructure shown in the plans shall be protected during construction. Also, the conduit shown to be installed on existing bridges 736 and 737 will have to be supported/protected/reset during the proposed construction. |
|
| Date Asked: 09/29/2017 | Date Answered: 10/03/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Please provide any available plans and specifications (even if they are preliminary) and schedules related to the installation of tolling facilities regarding this project. |
|
|
Answer:
The plans provided in the BTC are what is currently available regarding the tolling project. No additional plans, specifications or schedules will be provided. The DB team should anticipate the need for close coordination with the toll gantry contractor for construction access. It is currently anticipated that the construction of the gantries within the limits of this project will be underway but not necessarily complete during the construction and design phases of this project. |
|
| Date Asked: 09/29/2017 | Date Answered: 09/29/2017 |
| Poster: Steven Morin | Company: CARDI CORPORATION |
|
Question:
Please provide all pertinent NEPA documents that are pending approval as referenced in section 2.6.1 of part B of the RFP. |
|
|
Answer:
A Categorical Exclusion for the work as shown in the BTC was approved on 9/6/17. As stated in Part B, section 2.6.1 of the RFP; "Changes to the scope of the Project (as expressed in this RFP) proposed by the D/B Team shall require coordination with RIDOT to determine if additional documentation must be provided as part of the NEPA review process. Such changes may necessitate additional environmental studies or coordination with regulatory agencies to be carried out by the D/B Team. The D/B Team shall carry out any additional environmental commitments as a result of any re-evaluation and will be responsible for any schedule delays and associated costs." |
|