2008 Pavement Marking Service AgreementsQuestions and Answers – GeneralPosted October 3, 2008Q1. Would the ministry provide a list of changes to the base document for the three current contracts (Vancouver Island, Lower Mainland and Okanagan) from the previous documents (Thompson-Cariboo)? A. Other than the Area Specific Information, the only changes made to the RFP are as follows:
Sections 20.1 to 20.5 20 have been deleted.
Schedule 1 Posted July 28, 2008Q1. Would the ministry consider changing the ratings for the Quality Plan by either increasing the number of points from 10 or having a minimum score requirement? A. The ministry has considered this and has decided to leave the ranking as described in the RFP. Q2. Is this a lump sum or a unit price contract? A. This is a lump sum contract. Q3. Will the contractor have the right of first refusal on all additional work? A. No, there is no right of first refusal. The contractor must perform additional work assigned by the ministry. While it is the ministry’s intent to use the pavement marking contractor for most additional work within the service area, there is no guarantee that all work will be assigned to the pavement marking contractor. Q4. Do you expect the contractor to use the DPMMI as a Quality Assurance or a Quality Control tool? A. The ministry expects that the contractor will use the DPMMI as a QC tool initially. We do not object to the contractor using the DPMMI for other uses as well. The QA is intended to be carried out by another method to verify the results from the DPMMI. Q5. Will points be released following the award of the Pavement Marking Service Agreement? A. As per Section 17.3 of the RFP, the Province may in its sole discretion, elect to publicly announce the results of the ranking of the Proposals, including the names of the Proponents and the total combined points awarded to Proponents’ QP Proposals and Price Proposals, but not the separate points awarded to QP Proposals and Price Proposals. Q6. How was the 10% trigger determined? A. The 10% trigger for an immediate change in a payment (in Article 6) has been changed to 5% for all services areas with the exception of the Lower Mainland Service Area where it has been changed to 3%, and the North West Service Area which will remain at 10%. Q7. In Article 6.1(a) did the ministry intend for it to read “Season” or “Contract Year”? A. This has been clarified or will be shortly in the next amendment to the RFP. Q8. How were the weightings determined for the Price Index Factor? A. The ministry sought advice from a consulting firm and an in-house economist. Q9. Will contractors be penalized if they cannot meet the milestone dates in Schedule 6 because of extended winter conditions or other events beyond the contractor’s control? A. Schedule 6 provides for the ministry to grant an extension of time under certain circumstances. Proponents are encouraged to review this Schedule in detail. Q10. Will contractors be held responsible for repair of lines that are damaged by the maintenance contractor through the course of their activities (i.e. crack sealing or plowing)? A. The Pavement Marking Contractor will be expected to communicate their plans with the Highway Maintenance Contract to ensure smooth coordination. Where conflicts arise, the Pavement Marking Contractor should notify the Pavement Marking Operations Coordinator (PMOC). Q11. Are deltas included as edge lines? A. Yes. Q12. When will the first annual adjustment be made? A. The first annual adjustment will be made probably in May 2010 and will be retroactive to Dec. 16, 2009. Q13. What evidence does the ministry have that the specifications can be met on the BC road system? A. ministry researched multiple jurisdictions within Canada as well as the U.S. We received the specifications for pavement marking and discovered that the majority of jurisdictions researched were specifying between 15 wet mils to 20 wet mils. Washington State, Montana, Alaska, Minnesota, Illinois and Idaho are a few of the areas we researched. Q14. Is Acetone Paint an option? A. Acetone paint may work but there is no guarantee that it will continue to meet federal requirements. Q15. In the Introduction to the Specifications, section 3.1(a), the reference to Section “A” should read Section “B-Definitions”. A. The specifications have been clarified or will be shortly in the next amendment to the RFP. Q16. In the Specifications there are references to test site, checkpoint area, test location, and test area. Are these terms synonymous? A. The specifications have been clarified or will be shortly in the next amendment to the RFP. Q17. In the Introduction to the Specifications, section 8.1, are the references to ASTM D913-88 correct? A. The correct reference is ASTM D913-03. This has been corrected or will be shortly in the next amendment to the RFP. Q18. In the Introduction to the Specifications 7.2, “test” should be inserted before the word site. A. Yes. This has been corrected or will be shortly in the next amendment to the RFP. Q19. Who will do the Testing referred to in the Introduction to the Specifications-Section G? A. It will be performed either in house or by a consultant. Q20. Is the ministry willing to work with the contractor re DPMMI? A. As the Digital Pavement Marking Measuring Instrument is relatively new to the contractors and the ministry, we understand that there will be some learning involved. However, we expect that if the contractor is experiencing some difficulties that they are documenting them and are diligently pursuing resolution with the manufacturer. Q21. Schedule 9 section 8.1 (c) states rounding will be to one decimal place. Is this correct? A. This has been corrected or will be shortly in the next amendment to the RFP. Q22. Is the ministry willing to consider ways of dealing with inconsistent readings for reflectometers? A. The Pavement Marking Operations Coordinators (PMOCs) will coordinate calibration where possible and compare readings between the units to decide whether further calculation will be required. Q23. When the closing date is extended for the two contracts in the north, will the schedule for the remaining 5 service areas be affected? A. Yes. The new schedule will be posted on the ministry’s website asap. Q24. Will the ministry accept an ISO based QMS as a Proponents’ Quality Plan? A. Yes, if it meets the requirements in the RFP for the Quality Plan. Q25. Why does the Routine Line quantities quoted in Schedule 4 differ from the actual line kilometers on the pavement? A. The ministry is reviewing its line inventory for all service areas. An amendment has been issued or will soon be issued to address this issue. Proponents are encouraged to review section 22.3 of Volume 1 and article 6.4 of Volume 2 of the amended RFP. Q26. The form of ILOC in the RFP has no provision for the Issuer to give notice of cancellation. Is this an omission on the part of the ministry? A. No, it is not an omission. The ministry has used this form of ILOC for many other RFP processes and the banks have provided ILOCs. Posted July 11, 2008Q1. Where can we find and/or access information on “CHRIS” Corporate Highway & Resource Information System referenced in Schedule “1”, Introduction, B (b). A. CHRIS is the system used by the Ministry to store, display and manipulate locational information on our highways and the inventory associated with those highways. The system is capable of storing information on the line inventory, however no data related to the line inventory is currently stored in CHRIS. At the present time, contractors do not have access to CHRIS. This may change in the future. As mentioned previously in response to another question, the information contractors will require to meet the requirement outlined in the Introduction to the specifications will be provided to the contractors. We can provide it in hard copy or in electronic format. Q2. Is the Upset Price an annual amount or for the full 5 years? A. The Upset Price is the maximum a Proponent is permitted to propose as their Annual Contract Price for the first Contract Year. The Annual Contract Price will be adjusted annually in accordance with Schedule 9 (Annual Adjustment Process). Posted July 10, 2008 (2) Q1. Why would the Ministry not use actual Statcan Index data in the examples in Schedule “9” Annual Adjustment Process – Appendix “B” – Calculation (1) & (2)? A. As the numbers in the examples are for illustrative purposes only we did not use actual data. You are correct in noticing that the 2006 Index numbers are not the same in the two examples. Every month, Stats Can releases preliminary results for the month; one month later, they may revise that number. On an annual basis, they may also revise any one of the previous 12 months of data. And, finally, on a 5 year cycle, they may adjust monthly survey data going back several years and benchmark it to census data to improve the quality of the estimates. This means that the data for a calendar year is never final but in a continual state of flux as new information is received by Stats Canada. Posted July 10, 2008Q1. What is CHRIS? A. CHRIS is the Ministry’s Corporate Highway & Resource Information System. The Pavement Marking Specifications (Introduction, section 3.6 c) state that the contractor must report test results by geographical location of the test site, referenced by offsets from CHRIS landmarks. Q2. Can a parent company issue the required Irrevocable Letter of Credit (ILOC), or must the name of the ILOC match that of the proponent putting in the proposal? A. The name on the ILOC (name required under ‘Customer’) must match that of the proponent putting in the proposal. So, no, a parent company cannot issue the ILOC. Q3. Are there special requirements that out-of province proponents should be aware of? A. Out-of-province proponents are encouraged to review subsections 2.1 (a) and (b) of the Pavement Marking Service Agreement.The General Information Line for Corporate and Personal Property Registries (which is an office of the Ministry of Finance) is: 250 387-7848 or 604 775-1041. Specific questions should be directed to the Corporate Registry Office. Posted June 11, 2008Q1. Will there be deadlines for the completion of Routine Lines? A. Yes there will be; the deadlines may vary from one service area to another. The completion dates will be included in the RFP. Q2. Will low Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC’s) requirements shorten the pavement marking season? A. We do not expect the move to low VOC paint to shorten the painting season, however we do expect that contractors may have to use different paints to adapt to different conditions if they are to benefit from the full duration of the season. Q3. Who is responsible to coordinate the sweeping? A. The Pavement Marking Contractors are responsible for taking the lead in coordinating with the Highway Maintenance Contractor to plan the sweeping. There must be good communication between the Maintenance Contractor and the Pavement Marking Contractor. The Pavement Marking Contractors should report any issues to the Regional Pavement Marking Coordinators. Q4. Is the Fee Schedule for the upset price only? A. Yes. The fee schedule outlines the payment for Routine and Quantified Pavement Marking Services. Additional Pavement Marking Services work will be paid by invoice. Q5. Will there be any holdbacks? A. No monthly or seasonal holdbacks are contemplated, however, the contract will include provisions for holdbacks, retentions (for unacceptable work) and consideration charges (for failure to meet deadlines). Proponents are encouraged to review the RFP carefully to get a full understanding of those provisions. Q6. If we use the RPLs for other neighbouring jurisdictions we could end up with different colours of yellow. Is this OK? A. Contractors will be expected to meet the colour requirements for both white and yellow paints as outlined in the Introduction to the Specifications. Paint manufacturers have indicated that it is not difficult for products to be adjusted to meet this colour specification. Q7. Define a line kilometer? A. Line Kilometer means one kilometer of any line illustrated in Figure 7.1 of the “Manual of Standard Traffic Signs and Pavement Markings”. Here is the website link: Q8. Why are we asking for an ILOC (Irrevocable Letter of Credit) instead of a Bid Bond? A. The ministry has found that Bid Bonds are more appropriate for tenders. Because RFP’s are more subjective, and more difficult to bond, we ask for an ILOC.
|
 |
|
|
