Questions and Answers For:

Design-Build Services for I-95 Corridor Bridges 2017-DB-030 / 7565518

Please Note: If this is the first time accessing our system on our new web site, you will be required to reset your password.

The ask question function is now disabled;
please call 401-222-2495 x 4100 with any new questions.

Date Asked: 12/26/2017 Date Answered: 12/27/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
Is the existing traffic signal equipment at the East Street intersections to be salvaged and reset or are the existing foundations and equipment no longer up to code and/or RIDOT standards and will need to be replaced?
Answer:
The existing traffic signal equipment shall be salvaged and reset.
Date Asked: 12/22/2017 Date Answered: 12/27/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
BTC plan sheet No. 27 East Street TMP, Note 3, states "see temporary signalization plans for required traffic signal modifications". Can the referenced plan be provided in the upcoming addendum?
Answer:
Please disregard Note 3, the Design-Build team will develop temporary signalization based on their final design.
Date Asked: 12/20/2017 Date Answered: 12/21/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
Part B Technical Requirements, Section 2.3.2, states "the limits of roadway work required along I-95 shall be the milling and overlay limits needed within the segments of I-95 at each bridge location where the existing pavement markings are altered for shifting of traffic...". The I-95 NB & SB TMP's on sheets 25 and 26 indicate the limits of markings shifts to be well beyond the limits of micro-milling and overlay shown on both the typical sections and the general plans. Please advise.
Answer:
The minimum limits of milling and Overlaying of I-95 is between Central Avenue and the Massachusetts state border. The limits may change dependent on the Design-Build team final design.
Date Asked: 12/20/2017 Date Answered: 12/21/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
Please consider reducing the 15% DBE requirement on construction qualifying work to the 10% requirement that has been specified on recent similar D/B projects. Given the scope of work for this project the 15% requirement will be difficult to obtain.
Answer:
We cannot reduce the DBE requirement.
Date Asked: 12/20/2017 Date Answered: 12/20/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Part A: Instructions for Respondents 3.1 DBE and OJT Requirements "The Project has been assigned a total of TEN PERCENT (15%) Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation goal for "construction qualifying work", and...". Is the DBE goal 10% or 15% for construction qualifying work?
Answer:
15% for construction qualifying work.
Date Asked: 12/20/2017 Date Answered: 12/21/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Part B Project Technical Requirements 2.3.1 Scope of Work for Roadway Improvements bullet # 11 "Replacement of the Radar Vehicle Detector System located just west of East Street adjacent to I-95 in accordance with the job specific specification provided." No job specific specification has been provided. Is the contractor still required to replace the Vehicle Detector System? If yes can a job specific plans and specification be provided?
Answer:
Yes, please refer to specification CODE TMC.9901 provided on CD.
Date Asked: 12/20/2017 Date Answered: 12/20/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Part B: Project Technical Requirements 1.0 Scope of Work "Other highway work required will include ......milling and Overlaying of I-95 between Central Avenue and the Massachusetts state border"(approximately 4,400 linear feet). Base Technical Concept Drawings Sheet #8 shows the 2" Micro Milling and paving for I-95 NB limits as Station 256+25 to Station 270+25 (1,400 linear feet). Limits of 2" Micro Milling and paving for I-95 SB are shown as Station 256+25 to Station 269+25 (1,300 linear feet). Please clarify the maximum limits of 2" Milling and Paving for I-95.
Answer:
The limits of milling and Overlaying of I-95 is between Central Avenue and the Massachusetts state border.
Date Asked: 12/13/2017 Date Answered: 12/19/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
BTC Plan Sheets 21 and 22 are the profile drawings for the new Ramp L. Graphically the proposed new profile for Ramp L verse the existing from Station 3+00 to Station 7+00 indicates approximately a 1' increase in elevation from the existing to the proposed. At the bottom of the profile the existing grades are approximately equal indicating no fill in this area. Please clarify
Answer:
The plans will be revised by addendum.
Date Asked: 12/13/2017 Date Answered: 12/14/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Following up on the question regarding Appendix F asked on 12/06/17 … 1) Does the one copy of the RFP need to include the “BTC Deliverable 9-28-2017” files provided on the CD? 2) Is it acceptable to submit only the addenda cover pages instead of the full addenda?
Answer:
1) Yes, hard copy and on CD. 2)Yes
Date Asked: 12/08/2017 Date Answered: 12/11/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
Since this project is at a new tolling location is it still subject to the Buy America provision?
Answer:
yes.
Date Asked: 12/08/2017 Date Answered: 12/11/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
Please confirm if the steel erector is required to be AISC certified.
Answer:
confirmed.
Date Asked: 12/07/2017 Date Answered: 12/08/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
The plans specify a 7.50 inch concrete deck for all bridges. Part B, Section 2.4.3 of the RFP documents specifies that the deck shall be 8 inches. Please clarify.
Answer:
7.50 inches minimum, 8.0 inches is preferred.
Date Asked: 12/06/2017 Date Answered: 12/06/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Section 4.2 Proposal Format and Organization, Appendix A organization currently shows the evidence of insurance being submitted in two places. Please clarify if the insurance evidence should be submitted under the same tab as the bid bond or under its own separate tab.
Answer:
Same tab is acceptable.
Date Asked: 12/06/2017 Date Answered: 12/06/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
• Please confirm that the O.J.T. requirement due with the proposal submission is only a written statement as described in Section 3.1 of the RFP Instructions, and that the “On-The-Job Training Acknowledgement and Statement of Intent” Form provided in the Required Forms is part of the Department’s Post-Qualification process.
Answer:
confirmed
Date Asked: 12/06/2017 Date Answered: 12/06/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Is a Surety Letter required with the Technical Proposal? The state agency solicitation indicates yes, but the RFP does not refer to it. In past proposals, the RFP Instructions have specified to include a surety letter.
Answer:
Surety Letter is required per solicitation.
Date Asked: 12/06/2017 Date Answered: 12/08/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Appendix F requires submittal of RFP Documents and All Addenda. Is it acceptable to submit only an acknowledge statement that we received the RFP and all addendum?
Answer:
You may submit one copy of the RFP and all addendums and then an acknowledgement in the additional five copies.
Date Asked: 12/06/2017 Date Answered: 12/06/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Please confirm that the organizational chart and one page narrative can be included in an Appendix and does not count toward the page count.
Answer:
Appendices are not counted towards the page limit.
Date Asked: 12/06/2017 Date Answered: 12/06/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Will the required DBE forms be updated to specify the correct project? The Schedule of Participation and Letter of Intent specify Oxford St.Type your questions here.
Answer:
This will be revised by addendum.
Date Asked: 12/01/2017 Date Answered: 12/06/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
Per the RFP documents (Part B - 2.4.3 - 1. d.), the proposed bridge railing system shall be a "Test Level 5 system or better. A solid, entirely concrete barrier will not be allowed.". The BTC Plans show a TL-4 Solid Barrier on the Bridge Cross Section. Please clarify.
Answer:
The proposed bridge railing shall satisfy AASHTO LRFD criteria for a Test Level 5 system or better.
Date Asked: 11/28/2017 Date Answered: 11/30/2017
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 that the information provided in Part B, section 2.14.2 regarding existing utilities is correct.
Answer:
Utility relocation is not anticipated, Utility coordination is required. This will be clarified by addendum.
Date Asked: 11/27/2017 Date Answered: 12/01/2017
Poster: Steven Morin Company: CARDI CORPORATION
Question:
Please verify tolling/gantry work in the area of this project. The RFP states that "The approximate location of the gantry and associated control boxes, conduit, etc. is depicted on the BTC Plans. The gantry location is to be north of Plainfield Pike Brides between the I-295 SB Off-Ramp and On-Ramp." It does not appear that this specific gantry work would affect this project.
Answer:
This will be clarified by addendum.
Date Asked: 11/21/2017 Date Answered: 11/29/2017
Poster: Bernard Doherty Company: JF White
Question:
The Request For Proposals lists a proposal submission date of January 3, 2018. It will be difficult to obtain competitive subcontractor and vendor pricing due to the proximity of the date following the Christmas holidays. Would the department consider extending the proposal submission date two weeks to January 17, 2018?
Answer:
The proposal submission date for the project will not be postponed.
Date Asked: 11/15/2017 Date Answered: 11/17/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
Will the use of SIP forms be acceptable for this project?
Answer:
The use of SIP forms is acceptable.
Date Asked: 11/10/2017 Date Answered: 11/14/2017
Poster: Robert Wright Company: AECOM
Question:
Can RIDOT please provide as-built drawings of the existing bridges?
Answer:
Existing plans on CD can be pickup at Two Capitol Hill Room 260, Providence RI.
Date Asked: 11/08/2017 Date Answered: 11/14/2017
Poster: Robert Wright Company: AECOM
Question:
Would it be possible to eliminate the SF 330 requirement for this Proposal?
Answer:
Per Contract and Purchasing requirements, the SF 330 requirement can not be eliminated.
Date Asked: 10/31/2017 Date Answered: 10/31/2017
Poster: Gregory Fehrman Company: C&S Engineers, Inc.
Question:
The two Chief Inspector titles require 6 years of "Highway" and "Structural" engineering experience. Is it safe to assume the RFP is referring to design experience? In reviewing the duties of the titles it does not appear that extensive design experience is required. If the Department is looking for depth at in design experience can a proposer submit an alternate with additional staff for design compliance to be utilized on the project on an as needed basis.
Answer:
Please reference which section of the RFP in question.