Contractor's System Project Question and Answer Forum

-1-
Submitted: Wednesday 02-APR-2025 09:52 AM
Company: Schellinger Construction Co., Inc.
Contact: Grant Roberts
Please post the design files, dirt runs, mass diagram, and any additional geotechnical information.
Answer
Sumbitted: Thursday 10-APR-2025 12:07 PM
The design files for the requested project are posted here: DESIGN FILES
The requested files do not represent the staked project but are only design files.  The Department cannot guarantee the accuracy of the electronic data, particularly as it may be called up by your computer, nor does any data in these files supersede the data in the contract documents.
In addition, the Department will not make any revisions to the electronic files pertaining to the staked project, change ordered work, or changes that are made during construction to fit field conditions.
The mass diagram and dirt runs are provided for informational purposes only and represent plan quantities.  The Contractor remains responsible for selecting the best means and methods to complete the project within project guidelines. MASS DIAGRAM & DIRT RUNS
Attached are PDF Files of the available project alignment and/or structures geotechnical report(s), geotechnical report supplements, and geotechnical laboratory summaries. There is remaining geotechnical information that is voluminous and very difficult to compile in a concise manner. Contractors are welcome to come to MDT Headquarters to inspect rock samples taken for the project that are stored here or to look through the complete set of Geotechnical field investigation notes, laboratory testing, analytical, or other data in our project files. It should be noted that the project may have undergone significant changes during the design process after the original geotechnical report and supplements were issued. Thus, some of the information contained in these documents may be out of date or not applicable with regard to the advertised project. Some of the changes include, but are not limited to: Project splits (for funding, ROW issues, etc.) alignment and grade changes; and changes due to environmental factors (sensitive areas, etc.). The documents can be found at: GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS 

-2-
Submitted: Thursday 03-APR-2025 03:41 PM
Company: LHC
Contact: Sam Weyers
1. Can MDT confirm quantities for item 201310000, clearing and grubbing for 7.8 HA? A recent tree falling contract was award for 22.5 acres, on top of what was already cleared and not grubbed. It appears 7.8 HA is not enough.
2. Proposal sheet 4 shows 55.5 m3 for item 613010000 and summary table on plan sheet 22 shows 59.4 m3 for rip rap class 1. Which is correct?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 08-APR-2025 08:42 AM
1. The quantity of Bid Item 201 310 000 CLEARING AND GRUBBING is hereby revised to 17.8 hectares. Updated Plan Sheet No. 17 can be viewed here: SHEET_17
2. Plan Sheet No. 22 is correct. The quantity of Bid Item 613 010 000 RIPRAP-CLASS 1 RANDOM is hereby revised to 59.4 cubic meters.
An amendment will be issued, updated bid files will be posted

-3-
Submitted: Wednesday 09-APR-2025 12:01 PM
Company: LHC
Contact: Sam Weyers
With traffic restrictions only allowing one mile section with only 15 minute accumulative delays, SP # 32 night restrictions, rock excavation, large amount of approach grading/excavation, large amount of path grading/excavation, along with all other clearing grubbing, topsoil, pipe, drainage, box pipe, etc - and not having ability to overlay operations, our preliminary schedule calculations show 240 days is not enough time. Please add 120 WD's to allow a third season of construction time.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 04:15 PM
15 working days will be added to the contract.  Contract time is hereby revised to 255 working days. 
Special Provision 2. Contract Time is hereby replaced with the following special provision: CONTRACT TIME
Please also refer to Clarification #1 for the updated Maintenance of Traffic special provision.

-4-
Submitted: Thursday 10-APR-2025 12:18 PM
Company: Schellinger Construction Co., Inc.
Contact: Grant Roberts
Would MDT consider changing the Riprap Class 2 for the Rock Buttress to Ancillary Armor meeting standard specification 701.06.4 Class 2? This would allow the contractor to possibly utilize onsite rock excavation or near by sources that may not meet the riprap requirement for soundness of aggregate using sodium sulfate.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 02:43 PM
Provide materials as defined in the bid package.

-5-
Submitted: Thursday 10-APR-2025 12:24 PM
Company: Schellinger Construction Co., Inc.
Contact: Grant Roberts
Other recent projects in this area have used Special Borrow with a maximum particle size of 6 inch, would MDT consider changing the maximum particle size for Special Borrow from 100 mm to 150 mm for this project?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 16-APR-2025 01:12 PM
Yes.  Provide special borrow with a maximum particle size of 150mm.

-6-
Submitted: Friday 11-APR-2025 01:02 PM
Company: Schellinger Construction Co., Inc.
Contact: Grant Roberts
Please provide additional detail and clarification on the basis of plan quantity for the Drill Presplitting Holes item. The majority of the areas noted in the plan summary have a 1.5:1 cut slope showing in the cross sections, which is not typical for drilling presplit holes on that angle.
Answer
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 11:38 AM
Presplit will be removed from the contract. Rock removal is included in Unclassified Excavation. The geotechnical reports indicate rock is expected in several slopes, and include seismic velocity information (for rippability). The contractor(s) should review the geotechnical reports to estimate rock quantities and method of excavation. Updated Plan Sheet No. 24 can be viewed here: SHEET 24
Bid Item 203 610 000 DRILL PRESPLITTING HOLES is hereby deleted from the contract. An amendment will be issued, updated bid files will be posted.

-7-
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 11:36 AM
Company: Montana Fence Company
Contact: Jim Ritter
1. Regarding bid items 607100014 Fence - Panel/Single Wildlife and 607100015 Fence - Panel/Double Wildlife are both designated as panels for 8' tall Wildlife Fence. However, there is no Wildlife Fence bid items on this project. Perhaps it was intended that these panels are not wildlife panels but standard wood single and wood double panels within a "Wildlife Friendly" fence...? 2. Regarding bid item 607204000 Farm Fence F4W. Fencing Summary remarks to use 'Metal Posts'. F4W utilized wood posts. If metal posts are required, and we do recommend metal posts, the bid item will need to be changed. 3. Regarding bid item 607202100 Farm Fence F2M - Fence Summary lists this section of fence as F2SM - we are assuming this is to be Smooth Wire, are we correct in this assumption? 4. Regarding the use of metal posts for R/W breaks. With the state provide a detail for R/W breaks with metal posts? If the state requires us to use double metal panels and off-set the center post at the R/W breaks, please add a metal double panel bid item.

-8-
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 02:32 PM
Company: Schellinger Construction Co., Inc.
Contact: Grant Roberts
Special Provision 52 Subsurface Drains states placing Drain Aggregate per subsection 710.10 over the drainage pipe, the plans show edge drain being placed in the special borrow material for the roadway typical and in bedding material for the rock buttress. Please clarify if Drain Aggregate is needed.
Answer
Submited: Friday 18-APR-2025 10:15 AM
Drain aggregate is not required to be placed around the edge drain in the special borrow material for the roadway typical.  The edge drain is to be wrapped with Subsurface Drainage Geotextile Filter, High Survivability, Class C as mentioned in special provision # 52.  No separate payment will be made for this geotextile and to be included in the payment for Edge Drain.  Bid the Edge Drain for the Rock Buttress as summarized on plan sheet 23, and as detailed on plan sheet 29.

-9-
Submitted: Wednesday 16-APR-2025 09:58 AM
Company: LHC
Contact: Sam Weyers
With respect to the answer of #3 above, could MDT justify how only 15 days were added? Also, please address SP#32. Is the contractor allowed to work at night?
And, the revised final maintenance of traffic is not realistic with 10 minute delays for 1 mile setup. We have recently witnessed on several occasions during the last weeks that current traffic control setup for clearing operations are less than one mile and still results in delays at or near 10 minutes. This is without multiple hauling units or other heavy equipment or multiple operations on or near the PTW. It will not account for the increase number of ADT that will be reality in May-September, during busy tourist time of year.

-10-
Submitted: Wednesday 16-APR-2025 10:04 AM
Company: LHC
Contact: Sam Weyers
We have had contact with the three prequalified blasting consultants listed on MDT webpage. One is not interested. Two are "maybe," best case scenario. We also reached out to Joe Green and he stated that "Contractors not currently pre-qualified by the Department to perform blasting work can obtain pre-qualification information from the CES Bureau, 2701 Prospect Ave., Helena, Montana. A complete Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) must be received a minimum of 14 calendar days prior to the bid opening as specified in the Invitation for Bids. Since the bid opening for Mountainside to MP 133 is on April 24, 2025, as per the above spec it would be too late for a blaster who is not currently on the prequalified Blasting Contractors list to do the blasting work on the project. You could ask a question on the QA to see if the work could be done by a blaster as long as they are on the prequalified list prior to starting the work." Please advise.
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 17-APR-2024 02:20 PM
The blasting subcontractor will be required to be on MDT’s Prequalified Blasting Contractor list at the time the work is performed.

-11-
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 11:45 AM
Company: Alpine Sign Inc.
Contact: John
Please provide Sign Design Calculations for this project.

-12-
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 01:42 PM
Company: Schellinger Construction Co., Inc.
Contact: Grant Roberts
Please verify the bid quantity of 20.2 M3 for Concrete Class General and 541 M2 for Design, Construct Retaining Wall. The wing walls for the pedestrian underpass are showing in the Retaining Wall Summary as being included in the quantity for Design, Construct Retaining Wall, is this correct or should the wing walls be part of the Concrete Class General bid item? If the wing walls are being paid for under the Design, Construct Retaining Wall bid item the bid quantity for Concrete Class General is more than double our calculated quantity for the cutoff walls and edge protection on the pedestrian underpass.

-13-
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 02:23 PM
Company: Diversified Materials
Contact: Mark Thomas
1. Could you please clarify the Soil Engineering Parameters for cohesion. Specification 46.B.6 shows no value for Retained Soil, but Table 1 of the February 8, 2023 Retaining Wall Options Memo shows 22 kPA.
2. Could you also please clarify the seismic value for the retaining wall sites? Specification 46.D.4 shows PGA = .22g, as does the November 5, 2012 Geotechnical and Materials Revisions Memo. Are these values already site modified (PGAm) values? If not, what is the USGS soil class? In addition, the February 8, 2023 Retaining Wall Options Memo states that the horizontal acceleration coefficient was taken as .22. Horizontal acceleration is generally calculated as kh = PGAm/2, which would suggest that PGAm = .44g. Which is correct?

-1-
Submitted: Thursday 03-APR-2025 03:30 PM
Company: LHC
Contact: Sam Weyers
Would MDT consider a flex time NTP date of 08-04-25?
Answer
Submitted: 07-APR-2025 11:10 AM
The flex NTP of June 23, 2025 will be used on this project.

-2-
Submitted: Wednesday 16-APR-2025 04:09 PM
Company: LHC
Contact: Sam Weyers
Does MDT have any surfacing as-built information or history on this section of road? Please post any core data that is available.

-3-
Submitted: Thursday 17-APR-2025 06:22 PM
Company: Mountain West Holding Co
Contact: Chris Connors
The project requires 4 each Permanent Impact Attenuators. Do these need to meet MASH criteria and do they need to be Low Maintenance style attenuators?

-4-
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 02:05 PM
Company: Knife River - Billings Division
Contact: Van Hildreth
Plan Sheet 03 - Typical Section 1. Is it MDT's intent that the "Leveling Plant Mix Lift" be a separate paving operation then place the overlay OR is the extra material placed in conjunction with the overlay?

-1-
Submitted: Thursday 27-MAR-2025 10:54 AM
Company: Battle Ridge
Contact: Cody Ham
45 contract days is very short, other projects similar to this have been over 100. Please add 60 working days to this contract.
Answer
Submitted: Friday 28-MAR-2025 01:52 PM
If acquisition of permits or material fabrication cause delays to the project and the contractor can show due diligence in pursuing these permits or materials, and the delay is truly out of the contractor’s control, contract time may be given for the delays. 
MDT will add 15 Working Days to the contract.  Contract Time is hereby changed to 60 Working Days. UPDATED CONTRACT TIME
UPDATE
Submitted: Thursday 10-APR-2025 11:43 AM
See answer to question #3. The Contract Time – Flex Time Proceed Date special provision was updated.

-2-
Submitted: Monday 31-MAR-2025 12:12 PM
Company: montana fence
Contact: larry iverson
Looking for clarification, The state has indicated [15] Single Panels. The 182" section should have a single at both ends and the 962' section should have a single at both ends and [1] in the middle. Should the other [10] really be doubles for directional changes or are they attributed to R/W breaks? 1. If they are for R/W breaks, how are we to build the panels? Are they two singles that are tied together or are they to be a double panel with center post being offset of the marker?
Answer
Submitted: Friday 11-APR-2025 07:53 AM
The project has 4 R/W breaks in the areas that are receiving new fence. Panels for R/W breaks will be paid as two single panels per break with the cost of the 2x6s included in the cost of the panels as per Detailed Drawing 607-20.

-3-
Submitted: Tuesday 08-APR-2025 03:23 PM
Company: Bishop Inc
Contact: Ryan Schaner
I have some concerns as far as the timeline for MDT's Heart Butte project southwest of Browning, MT. I see that Battle Ridge Builders requested an additional 60 working days and received 15 when the project was advertised The updated current timeline for completion is still too short. Fabrication of the pedestrian bridge will likely not be completed until toward the end of the listed timeframe. The Ashland - Rabbittown project we are currently working on has a completion time of 120 working days. The Ashland project is a very similar project to Heart Butte. We do not feel this is enough time to complete work. Please increase the total working days to 100.
Also, please clarify expectations on the of Memorandum of Understanding regarding aggregate sources. Are we strictly to use Tribal sources or if we show good faith in reaching out for quotes and a non-tribal entity gives us a lower price, we may use the non-tribal source?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 10-APR-2025 11:39 AM
The Notice to Proceed is hereby changed to a Flexible Notice to Proceed date of August 4th, 2025. The contract time will remain at 60 days. The intent is to allow for lead time on material procurement. The Contract Time – Flex time Proceed Date special provision is hereby changed: UPDATED CONTRACT TIME
Regarding aggregate sources, please refer to the MOU in the bid package stating, “MDT shall require the use of gravel, borrow and fill materials for construction projects covered by this MOU from tribal and/or allottee sources if the cost is less than or equal to non-Indian sources and meets state and federal specifications."

-4-
Submitted: Wednesday 09-APR-2025 09:29 AM
Company: Contech Engineered Solutions LLC
Contact: Brad
Assuming the contract is awarded in the first half of May the soonest we could deliver this pedestrian bridge would be late September or early October. Can the contract time be extended to accommodate?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 10-APR-2025 11:45 AM
Please refer to the answer in QA #3.

-5-
Submitted: Friday 11-APR-2025 07:45 AM
Company: montana fence
Contact: larry iverson
PEDESTRIAN RAIL: As for the build of the rail. Can we use 4 1/2" diameter rails? Our suppliers are saying that this is the normal build and what we have used in the past.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 08:35 AM
The use of 4.5” diameter rails will be acceptable if the post spacing is reduced from 10’ to 8’. The post spacing reduction is intended to reduce potential sag between the post that can occur in the smaller diameter rails.

-6-
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 08:32 AM
Company: Montana Fenctte Co
Contact: Eric Wutke
In regards to the answer of question #2. Drawing 607-20 shows how to attach the 2x6 right of way break to a wood fence end panel. This project calls for metal fence panels. 607-20 does not address how the state would like the 2x6 attached to two metal posts. Please provide direction of how you want to attach the 2x6’s? Another way to handle the gap would be to stretch barbwire across the panel opening to match the fence style and fill the gap. This would be a more functional and cost effective way to fill the gap. Would the state also provide a bid item specific to the right of way breaks as they are neither singles panels or double panels and should not be included in those bid items.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 10:40 AM
The use of barbwire is acceptable in place of the wood 2x6’s. MDT is looking into the option of creating a new bid item for R/W breaks; bid accordingly with the current bid items for this project.

-7-
Submitted: Tuesday 15-APR-2025 09:54 AM
Company: montana fence
Contact: larry iverson
regarding the answer about the 4 1/2" rails, we can do the 8' oc posts. do we use the same layout and go with 16' each side for total of 32' or do you want to change the layout and go with 24' on each side and a total of 48'. the other option would be to stay with the layout and do 5' oc posts and keep the total at 40' ?

-8-
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 12:10 PM
Company: Alpine Sign Inc.
Contact: John
Please provide Sign Design Calculations for this project.

-1-
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 12:12 PM
Company: Alpine Sign Inc.
Contact: John
Please provide Sign Design Calculations for this project
Answer
Submitted: Friday 18-APR-2025 02:25 PM
The sign design files for the requested project are posted here: 
SF 189 Wolf Point Rodeo Rd Sfty: SIGN DESIGN CALCS
RR Xing – MT 13 – Macon Signing: SIGN DESIGN CALCS
The requested files are only design files. The Department cannot guarantee the accuracy of the electronic data, particularly as it may be called up by your computer, nor does any data in these files supersede the data in the contract documents.
In addition, the Department will not make any revisions to the electronic files prior to award, changes needed via change ordered work, or changes that are made during construction to fit field conditions will be provided at that time per the requirements of Subsection 619.03.2.

No Questions available for this project.

No Questions available for this project.

No Questions available for this project.

No Questions available for this project.

No Questions available for this project.