-1-
 Submitted: Thursday 07-MAR-2019 03:31 PM
The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) is soliciting construction and design services for the design-build project identified below. Contractor and consultant teams (Firms) are encouraged to submit a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) response electronically to the email address in the RFQ or in hard copy to the Montana Department of Transportation – Engineering Division, Contract Plans Bureau, Room 101, 2701 Prospect, Helena, Montana by 11:00 a.m., local time on March 28, 2019 
 
This project includes the design and construction of highway improvements along Secondary 269 to provide enhanced roadside safety by providing wider shoulders and flatter slopes on both sides of the highway. The project is located between reference post 12.0 and reference post 18.1. The project is in Ravalli County between North Birch Creek Road and Pine Hollow Road.

The project RFQ is at the following link: RFQ

-1-
Submitted: Tuesday  30-APR-2019 12:20 PM
Addendum No. 1 issue 4/30/19 outlines several modifications to the Request for Proposal (RFP) scope of services.  A copy of the revised RFP containing the addendum and a revised bid price proposal form will be sent to each of the short listed firms.

-3-
Submitted: Wednesday 08-MAY-2019 07:35 AM
MDT will require a maximum of 30-calendar days to review appraisals for the project.  The firms need to understand that as they complete appraisals, they need to submit them to the Department as soon as possible.  We don’t want to get all of the appraisals at the same time, but to be submitted in smaller groups of 1-10 at a time. That will allow for a quicker turnaround by MDT so that the firms can begin the negotiation process while the rest of the appraisals are being completed.

-1-
Submitted: Monday    11-MAR-2019 05:07 PM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson  
With resumes counting as page limits, and the staffing plan of the SOQ being counted with the Technical Proposal scoring, can the page limit of the SOQ be increased to 40 pages?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday  12-MAR-2019 08:15 AM
Five (5) additional pages is added to the Statement of Qualifications page limit for a total page limit of 35 pages allowed.

-3-
Submitted: Thursday  21-MAR-2019 11:15 AM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson  
The survey files posted on the Q and A reference DIMAPs, specifically 8914000DIMAP001.dgn and 8914000DIMAP002.dgn. These files, along with 8914000SACMA001.dgn were not included in the posted information. Can MDT provide these files?
Answer
Submitted: Friday  22-MAR-2019 08:58 AM
The preliminary survey files are now available in the Q&A forum.  We recommend caution when using these files as the information is dated and may not provide complete project coverage.  The Design-Build Firms’ herewith accept responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the data.    SUPPLEMENTAL SURVEY

-5-
Submitted: Wednesday 17-APR-2019 09:52 AM 
Company: WGM Group 
Contact: Cody Thorson
The Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation report included in the SOQ documents, section 4.0, references geotechnical borings scheduled to be completed in February 2016. Was this drilling performed, and if so can the information be provided?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 17-APR-2019 11:53 AM
A comprehensive geotechnical investigation has not been performed, however some preliminary subsurface information has been obtained. This information is provided at the following link: SOIL SURVEY DATA
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.).

-7-
Submitted: Wednesday 24-APR-2019 10:31 AM
Company: WGM Group 
Contact: Cody Thorson
Are teams allowed to contact adjacent landowners along the project corridor, that will likely have R/W impacts, prior to project Award?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 24-APR-2019 13:49 PM
MDT requests that the firms refrain from contacting landowners and the general public prior to the award of the project.

-9-
Submitted: Wednesday 08-MAY-2019 07:01 AM  
Company: KLJ 
Contact: TRAVIS WIEBER
What timeline can be assumed for final environmental approval once the draft environmental document has been submitted to MDT?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 08-MAY-2019 09:54 AM
Assuming that the draft environmental document submitted to MDT by the Firm is complete and addresses all of the appropriate items, it takes 14-calendar days for MDT internal review/approval and then approximately 30-calendar days to obtain signatures and FHWA approval.   Note that if the draft document is inadequate, additional time will be required for the Firm's revisions and MDT's internal re-review of the document.

-11-
Submitted: Saturday  11-MAY-2019 06:28 PM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson  
Can MDT provide direction on permanent fence requirements? Is the intent to fence only properties that are currently fenced, or to fence all right-of-way?
Answer
Submitted: Monday  13-MAY-2019 12:54 PM  
In accordance with MDT's R/W policy, we only require replacing existing fencing, in kind.  The design-build firms will need to assess existing fencing and make their best estimate on the type and cost of the fence replacements.  Any upgrades from the firm's design that is agreed to during R/W Acquisition will be the responsibility of the Firm and no additional payment will be made by the Department.  The Firm should consider the risk of this potential situation and bid the project accordingly.

-13-
Submitted: Monday    27-MAY-2019 09:53 PM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson  
Should the following paragraph of the RFP be deleted? If not, please clarify this requirement. Part III. Threshold Requirements, Paragraph L. (bottom of page 14) "MDT makes no guarantee the Firm will receive the total quantities shown in the RFP for each location. The quantities are shown for information only to provide a consistent bid quantity to all Firms during the Bid Price Proposal phase. The actual quantities measured during construction will be paid. The unit prices indicated by the Firms in the Bid Price Proposal will be used in the event the quantities stated in the Firms preliminary design overrun or under run in accordance with Standard Specification 104.02. If the quantities change for only a portion of the elements included in the lineal foot cost, MDT and the Firm will negotiate a unit price based on the elements changed."
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday  28-MAY-2019 08:14 AM
The described paragraph located in Section III, Part L is deleted from the RFP. 

-15-
Submitted: Wednesday 29-MAY-2019 08:51 AM 
Company: WGM Group 
Contact: Cody Thorson
The Federal Wage Rates provided in the RFP appear to be incorrect (Building Construction Projects - Carbon Cty). Can MDT post the applicable wage rates for this project?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 29-MAY-2019 11:47 AM 
The Attachment G -Contract Backs which include the federal wage rates posted in the RFP are not correct.  For this project reference the revised Contract Backs which include the appropriate Highway wage rates at the following link:  CONTRACT BACKS