Contractor's System Project Question and Answer Forum

-1-
Submitted: Wednesday 28-AUG-2024 09:53 AM
Company: KLJ Engineering
Contact: Dan Richardson
RFP Section IV.M.9 Hydraulics.  Can you discuss what will be required to be stamped for hydraulics if culvert sizes and bridge sizes remain the same as designed in the bridging documents?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 05-SEPT-2024 06:57 AM
If the Firm changes the hydraulic performance of the site, the Firm must update the hydraulic modeling and stamp the updated hydraulic report associated with the site.  A general list of changes that could affect hydraulic performance, but are not limited to, is provided in Section IV., Part I., Bullet 3.d of the Project RFP.  Changes to the hydraulic performance of a structure will require MDT review and approval through the ATC process. 

At proposed bridge sites, if the Design Build Firm agrees to the Phase 1 recommendation, they will need at a minimum a stamped memo documenting: 1) the new abutment scour requirements, and 2) the bridge deck drain design.

-2-
Submitted: Wednesday 28-AUG-2024 09:53 AM
Company: KLJ Engineering
Contact: Dan Richardson
RFP Section IV. O.1 Utilities states “A new fiber line is being installed adjacent to the project as described in the Phase 1 Bridging Documents. As Built survey for this new fiber line has not been completed.”  Has this been completed so we can account for it on our bid price and ultimately in our final design?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 03-SEPT-2024 12:17 PM
Intermountain Infrastructure Group (IIG) is the utility owner for this new fiber line and completing installation under permit ending 40066.  Installation of the new fiber line is not complete and as-built information has not been submitted.   IIG was provided with Phase 1 Engineering construction limits when finalizing their route and are expected to remain clear of the project.  As-built information will be provided as a notification to the Q&A forum when available.

-3-
Submitted: Wednesday 28-AUG-2024 10:02 AM
Company: KLJ Engineering
Contact: Dan Richardson
RFP Section IV.P.2 Environmental and Permitting states “Cultural resource information is included in Attachment Q…. The Cultural Resources Consultation letters, and any cultural do not disturb areas, will be provided to the Firm after award.”  Can you direct us to which section of Attachment Q these are located and secondly, are there other areas that were not identified in the Bridging Document Plans as “do not disturb areas” that will be provided after the award?  This would aid in identifying if there are constraints that may affect the bid price and design.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 03-SEPT-2024 12:22 PM
The Cultural Resources Report and Cultural Resources Report Addendum will be provided to the  successful Firm after award. These documents were intentionally not transmitted to all Firms and will not be found within Attachment Q.  All Do Not Disturb (DND) areas resulting from the Cultural Investigations can be found in the Preliminary Plans (Attachment Q-016) and associated DWG files (Attachment Q-036).  No additional DND areas will be provided after award.

-4-
Submitted: Wednesday 28-AUG-2024 10:04 AM
Company: KLJ Engineering
Contact: Dan Richardson
RFP Section VI.A.5. The Q/A Forum closes 7 days prior to the Technical Proposal due date. Would MDT be willing to re-open the Q/A after the Technical Proposals are submitted for any bidding questions?
Answer
Submitted: Friday 30_AUG-2024 01:57 PM
The Q&A Forum will close 7 days prior to the Technical Proposal due date and will not re-open for questions after Technical Proposals are submitted.  MDT may post clarifications and notifications on the Q&A Forum no later than 5:00PM the day before bid price proposals are due.

-5-
Submitted: Thursday 29-AUG-2024 12:22 PM
Company: Morrison-Maierle
Contact: Jim Scoles
Please clarify who is conducting Right-of-Way fencing negotiations.  It has been noted that MDT is acquiring Right-of-Way identified through the Phase 1 Engineering Effort.  However, for sites where there is no acquisition, who is responsible for coordinating fencing agreements?  For example, if we disturb fence but are not changing Right-of-Way acquisition limits, who is handling fencing agreements?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 03-SEP-2024 04:15 PM
MDT will be responsible for negotiating and obtaining fencing agreements with Landowners.  For parcels where only fencing will be disturbed (negotiation only parcel), the Firm must notify the Glendive District Right-of-Way Supervisor a minimum of 8 weeks prior to removal of the fence to allow time for negotiations and agreements to be complete prior to placement of new fence.

-6-
Submitted: Thursday 29-AUG-2024 12:23 PM
Company: Morrison-Maierle
Contact: Jim Scoles
Relating the Technical Proposal requirements section, what are the expectations with the limited number of 11”x17” sheets allowed in the schedule and plan sheets sections?  There are some aspects of the RFP that imply additional information is required to be provided in these sections (bridge foundation plan and list of baseline schedule items).  Is it MDT’s expectation to have a fully detailed schedule with all major and minor activities or more of a rollup condensed schedule showing major activities?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 3-AUG-2024 01:05 PM
For the two 11”x17” sheets allowed in the schedule section, MDT would like to see a condensed schedule showing major design and construction activities. Page 19 of the RFP provides a list of the minimum activities that must be included in the schedule if applicable to the project.  For the twenty 11”x17” sheets in the preliminary plans section, MDT would like to see fourteen Road Plan and Profile Sheets showing the proposed structure for each site and six Bridge Plan sheets which consist of a general layout, footing plan, and transverse section for each of the two proposed bridges.

-7-
Submitted: Thursday 29-AUG-2024 02:43 PM
Company: Riverside Contracting
Contact: Stacy Hill
Please clarify who is responsible for obtaining the floodplain permit? The floodplain permitting was not covered in the Environmental and Permitting section of the RFP.  Often times with floodplain permitting, the SPA 124 permit and CWA 404 permit must be obtained prior to submitting the floodplain permit application.
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 05-SEPT-2024 07:02 AM
The Firm will be responsible for filling out the joint application, signing the joint application as the Applicant and as the Landowner on behalf of MDT, applying for the permit, application fees, obtaining the floodplain permit, renewing the floodplain permit, if required, during construction, and providing any required post construction documentation to the floodplain administrator.  Please check with the floodplain administrator, often on MDT projects a floodplain permit can be issued, conditionally upon receipt of the SPA 124 and CWA 404. 

-8-
Submitted: Friday 30-AUG-2024 03:26 PM
Company: Riverside/DOWL
Contact: Matthew James Mettler
The Phase I bridging documents 26-Hydraulics Reports and Models are missing the 05496 crossing data. The information included in the folder is duplicate data for the 05498 crossing. Can we get a copy of the report, model and associated supporting files?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 03-SEP-2024 01:46 PM
Site 05496 Hydraulics reports, model, and data: 9886000HYCPZ02

-9-
Submitted: Friday 30-AUG-2024 03:27 PM
Company: Riverside/DOWL
Contact: Matthew James Mettler
The SRH-2D model for the 05507 crossing is missing. Can we get a copy of the hydraulic model?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 03-SEP-2024 01:15 PM
Site 05507: SMS-SRH2D model: 9886000HY2DMZ11

-10-
Submitted: Thursday 05-SEP-2024 08:23 AM
Company: DOWL, LLC
Contact: Matthew James Mettler
There is conflicting information from the ROW document and TS&L report that crossing 05507 and 05512 on the perpetuation of the stock pass function. For the technical proposal, should we assume these crossings will be sized to meet hydraulic requirements, not for stock pass?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 11-SEP-2024 08:21 AM
Structures 05507 and 05512 should be sized to meet hydraulic requirements, not stockpass usage. MDT District ROW is in the process of negotiating stockpass terminations and fencing agreements at both sites.

-11-
Submitted: Monday 30-SEP-2024 09:44 AM
Company: Frontier West LLC
Contact: Kris Anderson
Structure ID 05508: Sheet No. 44 (Hydraulic Data Table) shows 54” RCP or 54” CSP. Sheet No. 45 shows 6’ x 7’ concrete culvert. Sheet No. 58 appears to show a 54” culvert. Sheet No. 72 shows a 6’ x 7’ concrete culvert. Various reports note both round pipes and variously sized RCB culvert structures. Would MDT please confirm the Structure ID 05508 bridging documents size and provide the minimum vertical and horizontal clearance if a stock crossing is required?
Answer
Submitted: Monday 07-OCT-2025 12:43 PM
The 54” diameter pipe was the minimum hydraulic opening.  Per landowner negotiations, site 05508 will need to be a stockpass that can fit an inscribed 6’ wide by 6’ tall square.  Phase 1 recommended a conceptual 6’ span x 7’ rise RCB stockpass with 1’ of infill material.  Provide a stockpass opening with a minimum 6’ vertical rise as measured from the top of infill material to bottom of ceiling, and a minimum 6’ span as measured from inside of wall to inside of wall. Up to 12”x12” top haunches (chamfers) of box culverts are allowed to protrude into the inscribed 6’x6’ square.

-12-
Submitted: Monday 30-SEP-2024 09:45 AM
Company: Frontier West LLC
Contact: Kris Anderson
Would MDT please confirm whether Spread Width is allowed to encroach into the travel lanes on for structures 05504 and 05505? The Design-Build Bridging Documents are inconsistent regarding the approved Spread Width and whether encroaching into the travel lanes to avoid discharge within the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) is an approved design deviation from the Bridge Design Specifications and MDT Hydraulic Manual. Generally, written narratives in the Bridging Documents describe deck drainage configured such that Spread Width does not encroach into the travel lanes at the bridges. However, the Bridge Plans show deck drainage spacing which results in Spread Width which does encroach into the travel lanes and avoids discharge within OHWM. Would MDT please verify that 2.7’ of spread with is approved at structure 5504 and 2.6’ of spread width is approved at 5505?
Answer
Submitted: Monday 07-OCT-2024 08:22 AM
Maximum allowable spread width is defined in Figure 14.3-1 of the Hydraulics Manual, and is stated in the Hydraulic Reports and Bridge TS&L Reports for sites 05504 and 05505, as being equal to the shoulder width. Any proposed deviation from this requirement will need to be presented as an ATC.  Discharge must meet the requirements of DEQs 401 certification which states “all permittees shall, to the maximum extent practicable, incorporate and construct design features that eliminate bridge deck run-off containing sediment, salt, or other pollutants from discharging directly into state water”.

-13-
Submitted: Monday 14-OCT-2024 11:04 AM
Company: Riverside Contracting, Inc.
Contact: Russ Gaub
Special Backfill for box culverts on sheet 45 of the plans states "When Specified". The prelininary estimates for each site do not have quantities specified for special backfill except for the 84" RCP. The crosss sections indicate some locations require special backfill with no quantity specified. Please verify whether or not special backfill is required for all box culverts.
Answer
Submitted: Friday 18-OCT-2024 12:37 PM
All culverts require either special backfill or non-corrosive special backfill based on site specific soil corrosivity.  Per MDT Hydraulics Manual 11.6.2.5.1 and Figure 11.6-4, non-corrosive backfill is required if soil resistivity is less than 300 ohm-cm, or if pH is less than 6.  The awarded Firm must develop a special provision for sites requiring non-corrosive special backfill.  Minimum design life for the concrete pipes must be met.

-14-
Submitted: Wednesday 23-OCT-2024 01:26 PM
Company: DOWL, LLC
Contact: Matt Mettler
The RFP requires a minimum font size of 10 for development of the Technical Proposal. This is certainly achievable for the narrative and other content with exception to publishing a 2-page Gantt Chart with adequate clarity to demonstrate knowledge of the project and the critical path. This has been challenging even using an 11x17 sheet size. Will MDT allow a smaller font size for the schedule?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 24-OCT-2024 02:53 PM
A minimum font size 5 can be used for the 11" x 17" sheets allowed in the schedule section of the Technical Proposal.

-15-
Submitted: Wednesday 30-OCT-2024 08:10 AM
Company: RPA
Contact: April Gerth
The PKT files used to develop the corridors don't appear to have been included in the bridging documents. Can these be provided or can we be directed to where they are in the documents?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 31-OCT-2024 02:17 PM
PKT files used for the Phase 1 Analysis are included in the following link: 9886000_PKT_Files

-16-
Submitted: Thursday 14-NOV-2024 01:58 PM
Company: Frontier West
Contact: Kris Anderson
Technical Proposal Page Limit, VI.B: Are the 20 plan sheets in the Preliminary Plans subsection included in the 40 page limit? If yes, can the total proposal limit be changed to 60?
Answer
Submitted: Friday 15-NOV-2024 11:48 AM
The 20 plan sheets in the Preliminary Plans subsection are included in the 40 pages/sheets Technical Proposal limit.  Pursuant to page 6 of the Pre-Proposal Meeting minutes,  additional pages/sheets will not be allowed.

-1-
Submitted: Monday 07-OCT-2024 04:51 PM
Company: Sundt/Schellinger JV
Contact: Ben Becker
We would like to request 3 additional pages for section 3.4 Organization Chart and Staffing Plan. This section is identical to the requirements in the RFQ for the smaller DAR project, which allowed for 2 - 11x17s for org chart and 2-8.5x11s for staffing plan. In addition, the additional pages would allow for proposers to provide a detailed org chart, while also fully answering all 7 questions in the staffing plan for this important MDT project.
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 09-OCT-2024 01:42 PM
MDT will not allow the request for additional pages in section 3.4 Organization Chart and Staffing Plan.