Question:
Hi

we are seeking advice on where MICC would like the tenders to capture the following item costs in the BOQ for required items for works.

= Accommodation and food - typically we have in past embedded this cost as part of the defect unit rate. Please confirm this is the preferred? If alternatively, it is preferred we place in the preliminaries (mob/demob), could an overview on billing requirements for cash flow forecast be provided (i.e. 50% of mob/demob, then 30% during works and 20% on demob?), as required in submission.

= As part of preliminaries site specific WH&S (site based management plan) and Quality Management Plans are required to be submitted. Please confirm which BOQ line item MICC would like us to tag these items to.

Thanks Heaps

Answered on 13/Jan/2025 01:14 PM:


Council would suggest that any contractor quoting for these packages, would look to embed the costing within their unit rates. However, it is up to each contractor to work out where they wish to incorporate this costing.

Question:
Hi,

The BOQ (2024-34_2024_Package_5-Price_Schedule_J1) in the downloaded tender pack contains cross check workings. We have reviewed the SOW defects raw detailed list and confirm some of the BOQ line items may have some minor differences compared to the SOW detailed defects lists.

Could we please get an updated confirmed BOQ for Package 5.

Thanks heaps

Answered on 13/Jan/2025 04:50 PM:


Council has updated and uploaded the amended BOQ file and added it to the Tender pack as of 13th Jan 4.50pm.

Question:
Can council please provide a kml (or excel file with coordinates) for this scope of works?

Answered on 13/Jan/2025 01:09 PM:


Council will provide a kml file to the award contractor, following the process council has undertaken over the past few years.

Question:
Good afternoon. There does not appear to be an amended BOQ in the documents available for download (as advised by Council on 13/01/25 at 4:50pm). Can MICC please provide this document? Thank you

Answered on 23/Jan/2025 05:36 PM:


Council wishes to advise that this file has been amended and uploaded.

Question:
Can you please clarify testing requirements for all MICC Packages. In the Tech Spec Schedule it appears that testing is only required for anything 100mm and above but in the Scope of Works Schedule it shows HF 25/50/75mm also require testing. Thanks

Answered on 31/Jan/2025 09:26 AM:


Good Morning,

Please find outlined the answer to your question.


Answer -

The testing requirements are as per DWG 149-034-SK501, supplied in the scope of works package.

Per SK501, HFG25/50/75 treatments require testing at the frequency specified on the drawing.

Question:
Based on the scope of works provided, the BOQ for Highland Plains Road should be:

Bulk Excavate - 9m3

Bulk Fill - Imported - 777m3

Gravel Resheet 100mm - 94.8m3

Gravel Resheet 150mm - 65.7m3

HFG 50mm - 3307.2m3

HFG 75mm - 9m3

HFG No Gravel - 5423m

MFG - 12351m

Can you please update or issue a new scope of works for this road? All of the other roads are matching the schedule.

Answered on 03/Feb/2025 01:56 PM:


Good afternoon,

Please note that an amended pricing schedule has been uploaded to correct calculation error on Highland Plains Road.

The amended quantities are highlighted green.

Note - There is a typo on Line 84 of the Highland Plains Road Form 4 - The "Additional Description" column should read "220m x 1m x 1m"

Question:
Good Afternoon,

We would like to get further clarity on a previous RFI relating to testing requirements for Heavy Formation Grading treatments. Can council please review and respond to the following queries?

1. Please confirm whether heavy formation grading (no gravel) treatments require compaction testing, or if these are proof roll only as this is not clearly defined within the testing requirements.

2. Within the testing requirements for heavy formation grade the testing options are for nuclear densometer or sand replacement. The sand replacement option shows compaction requirements at Subgrade and Base Course, whereas the nuclear densometer only shows compaction requirements for Base Course. As the HFG treatment does not expose the subgrade can you please confirm that no subgrade testing is required for these treatments

3. Following on from point 2 above can you please also clarify that both options (nuc and sandy) are available for the compaction testing at base course of HFG treatments?

Thanks.

Answered on 04/Feb/2025 08:56 AM:


Good Morning.

Please find the answers to your questions below.

1. Please confirm whether heavy formation grading (no gravel) treatments require compaction testing, or if these are proof roll only as this is not clearly defined within the testing requirements.

Answer: HFG (No Gravel) treatments do not require Compaction Testing.

2. Within the testing requirements for heavy formation grade the testing options are for nuclear densometer or sand replacement. The sand replacement option shows compaction requirements at Subgrade and Base Course, whereas the nuclear densometer only shows compaction requirements for Base Course. As the HFG treatment does not expose the subgrade can you please confirm that no subgrade testing is required for these treatments

Answer: Confirmed - Subgrade testing is not required on HFG treatments.


3. Following on from point 2 above can you please also clarify that both options (nuc and sandy) are available for the compaction testing at base course of HFG treatments?

Answer: Confirmed - Both options are available. Contractor and soil tester can elect to utilise whichever option suits best.