| 277 | 1 | DBE Goal | 06/13/2025 09:18 AM | Tungsten Engineering Contractors | Response Published |
|
| Question: Please provide the document from the federal government that directs NDOT to remove the Enterprise Goal from this project. |
| Answer: NDOT is not required to set goals on every project under 49 CFR 26.51(e)(2). |
|
| 278 | 2 | Existing Bridges | 06/16/2025 05:54 AM | Q&D Construction | Response Published |
|
| Question: Can you please provide any as built information and the hazardous material information for each bridge structure. |
| Answer: As-built information has been loaded to the E-bidding portal. Reference the link in section 102.05 of the special provisions for hazardous materials information |
|
| 279 | 3 | Bridge deck finish | 06/16/2025 07:19 AM | Q&D Construction LLC | Response Published |
|
| Question: On the new Garson Bridge it tells us to Groove the Deck, place a Surface Sealant and put a Thin Bonded Multilayer. Can you confirm which one it is to be? Typically, the bridge deck prep item for Thin Bonded Multilayer should be under a 497 Bid item and not a 646 Bid Item? As the two prep methods can be different? Also, Per NDOT's latest Design Manual revision shouldn't the Mainline I-80 Bridges have Polymer Overlays in lieu of Multilayer? |
| Answer: The grooving and surface sealant will not be required on structure I-3393. Remove the following bid items related to structure I-3393 Garson Road over I-80: • 502 0670 Groove Concrete Deck Slab • 646 0160 Surface Sealant For all bridge replacements, please substitute bid item 497 0100 Bridge Deck Preparation in place of bid item 646 0110 Bridge Deck Preparation. The Special Provisions include all relevant information related to the appropriate 497 bid items. Thin bonded multilayer overlays are required for the bridges. Revised sheets and bid items will be provided in an upcoming supplemental. |
|
| 280 | 4 | PTOE requirement | 06/19/2025 09:49 AM | Q&D Construction LLC | Response Published |
|
| Question: Under 625.03.05 states that Traffic Control Plans are to be stamped by a PTOE. Can this be deleted or further clarified. Is it truly necessary, as it appears the phasing and TC plans essentially already been established. Is this for standard lane closures also? |
| Answer: The phasing and conceptual traffic control plans submitted to date are limited to bridge construction and do not address the full scope of temporary traffic control required for the entire project. The Department expects comprehensive traffic control plans that encompass both bridge construction and all other project components. Since traffic control is the contractor’s responsibility, all plans must be prepared and stamped by a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer (PTOE), including those that incorporate bridge construction phasing. |
|
| 281 | 5 | Traffic Management | 06/24/2025 09:56 AM | Granite Construction | Response Published |
|
| Question: Special provisions section 108.04 paragraph 11 limits the “closure” of EB or WB I-80 to 15 minutes. Further, the Engineer determines the amount of time between traffic stops if more than one closure is required. Full closures exceeding 15 minutes will be required for the bridge demolition and bridge painting at Garson. Paragraph 15 allows the use of the EB on/off ramp at Garson to be used as a mainline diversion for EB traffic. No such diversion language exists in the spec for WB traffic. Please confirm that the use of the EB diversion between 8 PM and 6 AM is allowable for the full 10 hours and not subject to 15 minute increments as mentioned in paragraph 11. Please provide WB full closures for the work requiring said closures. Lastly, for the WB girder erection and SIPMD placement, please specify the length of time between allowable 15 minute closures so that the correct number of shifts can be determined for this work. |
| Answer: Incremental temporary rolling stops of public traffic on I-80 are allowed between the hours of 9:00 pm to 6:00 am nightly. The Department expects all vehicles to be cleared from the queue before the subsequent rolling stops are implemented. The Department anticipates the use of old US 40 for the detouring of Westbound mainline traffic in addition to the use of the Garson Road interchange to detour Eastbound mainline traffic between the hours of 8:00 pm. and 6:00 am., for structure demolitions periods not to exceed 10 hours. The Department intends to minimize the use of Old US 40 to avoid nightly disturbances to the residential area. Please see subsection 108.09 for the liquidated damages for failure to meet these requirements for the detouring of I-80 mainline traffic and/or for when using rolling stops. Please refer to the E-bidding “Additional Documents” for the conceptual traffic control plans associated with the project. 108.04 and 108.09 language in the special provisions will be updated in an upcoming supplemental. |
|
| 282 | 6 | Anticipated Start Date | 06/30/2025 04:02 PM | Q&D Construction LLC | Response Published |
|
| Question: Based off the Bid date, the contract going to the Board for approval and the 60 day NTP. This puts the approximate start of the contract at the end of November/beginning of December. With No "Winter Suspension" on the project. Are we to assume that the project will start in December or can we assume it will push to a March first start date? |
| Answer: Section 108.02 will be modified with a hard NTP date of March 2, 2026 in an upcoming supplemental. |
|
| 283 | 7 | Concrete Quantities | 06/30/2025 04:27 PM | Q&D Construction LLC | Response Published |
|
| Question: Looks like the DA Quantity includes the "Decorative Structures" on the Garson Bridge Structure plans. Also, it appears that the Barrier rail on top of the Retaining walls is labeled as DA Concrete. Typically that is Quantified and Paid under EA Concrete. |
| Answer: The Decorative Structures are included under Class DA and the barrier rail on the retaining walls will also be Class DA concrete. |
|
| 284 | 8 | Bid Item 81 Structural Steel | 07/02/2025 12:00 PM | Granite Construction | Response Published |
|
| Question: Can the DOT please clarify what is in the Structural Steel Bid Item No. 81? Are the bearing plates & tapered sole plates at the bridge abutments paid for under Bid Item 81 structural steel? Are the Image Panel Connection details such as the ones shown on Sheet LD158 & 159 paid under Bid Item 43 Image Panel, or Bid Item 81 Structural Steel? |
| Answer: Bid Item No. 81 Structural Steel includes the tapered sole plates and the armored edges at the end of the approach slabs. The bearing plates are paid for under Bid Item No. 72-78 Precast Concrete Members. The image panels are paid for under Bid Item No. 43 Image Panels. |
|
| 285 | 9 | 642.05.01 Concrete Panel Wall | 07/02/2025 02:40 PM | Granite Construction | Response Published |
|
| Question: The Standard Specifications require a pay item for coping to be paid by the Linear Foot. No such pay item exist in this projects Bid Items. How is the Coping to be paid for on this contract? |
| Answer: Bid item 642 0120 Coping will be added in an upcoming supplemental. |
|
| 286 | 10 | Phase 3 of Bridge construction | 07/08/2025 05:54 AM | Q&D Construction LLC | Response Published |
|
| Question: The Bridge Sheets shows all Traffic to run on the Eastbound structures. Is Traffic not allowed to run on the phase 1 completed structure due to the necessary stressing/closure pours between phase 1 and phase 3? Is there a certain time period during stressing/closure pours that traffic is not allowed to run on them while this is occurring? |
| Answer: Traffic cannot be placed on the completed westbound (WB) structure during Phase 3 for the following reasons: The temporary closure pour must be removed to allow placement of the Phase 3 girders. The temporary barrier rail will not be allowed to be pinned to the deck and therefore does not meet the requirements for live traffic. All girders across the structure must be post-tensioned (PT) together, and live loads are not permitted on the bridge during stressing operations. |
|
| 287 | 11 | Temporary widenings on I-80 | 07/08/2025 06:03 AM | Q&D Construction | Response Published |
|
| Question: It appears that NDOT has Quantified and compensating the contractor for the Cross overs. It appears that any necessary widening of I-80 to accommodate the 4 lanes of traffic will have to be inclusive of the Traffic control Bid item? What are the requirements of the Temporary Widening? is there a specific base depth/asphalt thickness? |
| Answer: The following information will be added to the special provisions in the 108.04 in an upcoming supplemental. "The minimum structural section of any temporary pavement sections shall consist of 6” plantmix bituminous surface on 8” Type 1 Class B aggregate base along I-80 and 4” plantmix bituminous surface on 6” Type 1 Class B aggregate base on collector distributor roads. All work and material associated with construction of temporary pavement sections shall be incidental to Rent Traffic Control Devices bid item no. 6250490." |
|
| 288 | 12 | Integrally Colored Barrier Rail | 07/08/2025 06:14 AM | Q&D Construction LLC | Response Published |
|
| Question: On Sheet L101 to L109 it states that integrally color the Concrete Barrier rail, using Wooden Peg for certain locations and Tan Plan in the other locations. Is this specific to just the new Single Slope Rail? Usually this is defined in section 502 of the Special Provisions. |
| Answer: The intent is for the existing roadway rail, L101, and new bridge rail to be painted. All other barrier rail shall be integral color. Reference call outs on sheets L100's and LD100's. Additional language for integral colored concrete will be added to section 502. |
|
| 289 | 13 | Bridge Girder Strand Conflict | 07/10/2025 03:45 PM | Western pacific Precast | Response Published |
|
| Question: Bridge I-3394 and H-3396 include either 2 or 4 harped strands with transverse post tensioning ducts. It appears that the harped pretensioning strand will conflict with the transverse post tensioning duct and the large duct coupling block out. As an example, reference drawing B221 for strand locations and B223 for PT block out details. |
| Answer: The dimensions shown in the plans indicate 2.5-inches of clearance from the upper-most harped strand to the lowest point on the transverse PT Block outs. The detailed views on plan sheets B221 and B223 are not drawn to scale. Harped-strand depiction is for conceptual clarity and is not depicted as the actual strand profile |
|
| 290 | 14 | Roadway Widening Scope Clarification | 07/11/2025 09:21 AM | Road and Highway Builders, LLC | Response Published |
|
| Question: In order to ensure less ambiguities in the bidding and building process, the widenings required to accommodate the conceptual temporary traffic plan need to be well defined. This should be a permanent roadway expansion because the bridges are already built to this width. The cost magnitude of these widening warrants this work to be permanently incorporated into Interstate 80 future capacity needs. Please provide structural sections and plan sheets including quantities to be paid for the required scope of work. If NDOT would prefer to remove the widening please provide final grades and additional roadway excavation quantities. |
| Answer: The traffic control plans provided demonstrate a conceptual plan for maintaining traffic and do not include compensable quantities. The amount of roadway widening will be determined by the means and methods selected to achieve the contractual requirements. This is not a capacity project. Please reference the contract documents for the final quantities and permanent construction configuration. |
|
| 31 | 15 | Structural Shoring | 07/11/2025 09:25 AM | Granite Construction | Response Published |
|
| Question: Note 4 on Sheet B406 references removal of shoring adjacent to the TMWA 20" waterline. Due to the expectation of boulders and cobble materials at the site we will need to install drilled soldier piles along with wood lagging for the shoring system. Removal of concreted soldier piles will not be possible. Is it possible to abandon the shoring in place and cut 2' below finished grade? Additionally, the remaining shoring on the project is silent on removal requirements leaving the standard specification 206.01.01 requirements to be applied and much of the shoring will be in similar conditions. The standard specifications indicate removal unless permitted. If the system required is soldier piles and is necessary to concrete in, will the state allow abandonment in place for these remaining areas? Removal of shoring is a significant impact and should be understood at bid time. |
| Answer: The Department finds the abandonment of the shoring depicted on Sheet B406 adjacent to the TMWA 20-inch waterline acceptable down to 2 feet below finished grade. All aspects of a temporary shoring system must be thoroughly reviewed prior to considering any partial abandonment. This includes detailed plans for partial removal and accurate documentation of the portions that will remain in place. All affected stakeholders, including private utilities and local agencies, may also need to review proposals for systems that are to remain partially in place. Without these details, the Department cannot approve any additional shoring abandonments |
|