Project: Construction of 4-lane with paved shoulder highway from km 112.950 to km 147.

200 of NH-731A along with Chitrakoot Bypass on

EPC Mode in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
1. General Details to be provided to As per MoR&TH Circular F.No.H-39011/30/2015-P&P(VII), Dated 1st June,
the EPC Contractor Project 2017, following details are to be uploaded for e- procurement:
Report a) Introduction and project background
1) Overview of project location, project objectives etc.
2) Overview of report structure, deliverables etc.
b) Engineering Surveys
1) Road Inventory Survey as per IRC:SP:19
2) Chainage wise details of pavement composition survey
3) Geo-technical and sub-soil explorations as per IRC:78
4) Pavement composition and condition survey as per IRC:SP:19
5) Pavement roughness survey as per IRC:SP:16
6) Pavement structural strength survey as per IRC:81
7) Pavement deflection survey as per IRC 81-1997
8) Sub grade characteristics and strengths
9) Topographic survey results (using LiDAR or better technology)
10) Plan and profile as per IRC:SP:19
11) Hydraulic investigations as per IRC:SP:13 and IRC:5
12) Hydrological investigations as per IRC:5
13) Details of sub-surface utilities mapped through Ground Penetrating
Radar, Induction Locator or better technologies
14) Inventory of bridges, culverts and structures
15) Condition survey for bridges, culverts and structures
16) Water sample tests as per MoRTH specifications
17) Video survey of entire highway stretch
18) Any other engineering details relevant to the project
19) Land acquisition and clearance status/report
20) A detailed design summary/key proposed improvements
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
c) Traffic Studies and Demand Forecast Designs
1) Details of nature and location of traffic surveys
2) Results of traffic surveys using ATCC systems and manual
verification of samples
3) Analysis on traffic flow characteristics (Hourly, daily, annual level)
4) Analysis on pedestrian flow characteristics
5) Identification of black spots on the corridor
6) Analysis on travel characteristics of passenger and goods trips
7) Traffic forecast approach and analysis
8) Any other traffic details relevant to the project
d) Cost and Rate Analysis
1) Detailed BOQ with drawing volume
2) Cost estimate for construction with rate analysis
3) Economic Analysis
e) Environmental Assessment and Rehabilitation Plan
1) Option for alignment alternatives considered and conclusions
2) Land environment data and details/impact/mitigation measures
3) Air environment data and details/impact/mitigation measures
4) Water resources details/impact/mitigation measures
5) Noise environment details/impact/mitigation measures
6) Biological environment details/impact/mitigation measures
7) Any other environmental related details relevant to the project
f) Detailed drawings of topographic, alignment and land use surveys
1) GADs of New bridges, ROBs/RUBs and grade separators
2) Highway geometric designs
3) Roadside drainage
4) Intersections, grade separators and interchanges with ramps
5) Urban service roads
6) Bus-stops

Page 2 of 10
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries
2. General Geotechnical Investigation
Report
3. Annex-III, Schedule A Alignment Plan:
The alignment of the
Project Highway is
enclosed in alignment plan.
Finished road level
indicated in the alignment
plan shall be followed by
the contractor as minimum
FRL. In any case, the
finished road level of the
project highway shall not
Page 3 of 10
Our Comments / Clarifications Required
7) Toll plazas
8) Pedestrian crossings
9) Utility relocation
10) Pavement
11) Structures
12) Removal of trees
13) Any other details relevant to the project
g) Details of Road safety furniture
1) Road signs
2) Pavement markings
3) Safety Barriers
4) Railings
5) Delineators
6) Chevron markings
7) Traffic attenuators
8) Crash barriers
9) Overhead signs
Kindly provide all the details mentioned above.
Kindly provide Geotechnical investigation Report for better understanding of
the project.
As per tender document, the project is under EPC mode and project design
is Contractor’s responsibility. So, minimum FRLs clause is inappropriate for
the Contractor and will create ambiguity and restriction during design of
profile. Contractor should be given the flexibility to design the profile
according to the requirement of site feasibility / technical specifications and
manual.
Therefore, kindly amend/delete the minimum FRL. clause accordingly.
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
be less than those
indicated in the alignment
plan. The contractor shall,
however, improve/upgrade
the Road profile as
indicated in Annex-III
based on site/design
requirement.
4. Annex-II, Schedule A Dates for providing Right of Kindly share the present status of land acquisition.
Way of construction zone:
The dates specified herein
shall in no case be beyond
150 (one hundred and fifty)
days after the Appointed
Date.
5. Corrigendum-V, dated Length of the Project Road The project road is from Km 102.420 (D Ch. 112.950) to Km 136.020 (D Ch.
24.01.2024 mentioned in Project Title: 147.200), left limb of bypass from Km 8.3 to Km 0.0, and including
RFP for the work of improvement of existing road from Km 99.620 to Km 102.420 and Km
Construction of 4-lane with 115.920 to Km 120.650 and total length is written as 50.08km. Whereas the
paved shoulder highway length of project road section comes out 42.55km as per the RFP project title
from km 112.950 to km (from km 112.950 to km 147.200=42.55). Upgradation details not provided-
147.200 of NH-731A along Please Clarify.
with Chitrakoot Bypass on
EPC Mode in the State of
Uttar Pradesh.
6. Description of Project, Upgradation of existing For Design upgradation, kindly provide all the reports/drawings and all the
Annex-I of Schedule-B section from Km 99.620 to related data in Word, Excel and CAD format. We understand that only
102.420 and Km 115.920 overlay is to be provided over the existing Road, no geometric improvement
to 120.650. is in the Scope of the EPC Contractor. Also widening/reconstruction/new
construction of Cross-Drainage structures is not in the Scope of EPC
Contractor.
7. Clause 2.8 of Schedule-B Details of Slip Road In P&P Drawings Slip Road from Ch. 146+050 to Ch. 146+665 on both side
is shown whereas in the table of Clause 2.8 it is not given. Pl. Clarify.

Page 4 of 10
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
8. Clause 2.5 (a), Type of The information provided In the table for S.no. 1 TCS 6 is applicable which have 2.5m wide paved
Shoulders for S.no1 is not matching shoulder but in the table it is given as 1.5m.
Pl. revise the table.
9. Clause 2.5, Type of The information provided In the table for S.no. 1 TCS -8 is applicable which have 1.0m wide earthen
Shoulders for section for One time shoulder but not shown in the table. At S.No.3 , Width of Paved shoulder &
improvement is Earthen shoulders are shown as 1.5m & 1.0m respectively whereas as per
mismatching. applicable TCS there will be only paved shoulder.
Pl. revise the table.
10. Clause-6 of Schedule-B, Discrepancies in Lined & (i) Details of Lined Drain for Additional one time improvement- The lined
Unlined drain drain has been mentioned in table from Ch. 99+620 to Ch. 102+420 in
Schedule-B. As per TCS Schedule for this section TCS 8 is applicable,
in TCS -8 Unlined Drain has been Shown.
(ii) Details of unlined Drain for Additional one time improvement- Unlined
drain has been mentioned in table from Ch. 117+620 to Ch. 119+220 in
Schedule-B. As per TCS Schedule for this section TCS 8B is applicable,
in TCS -8B lined Drain has been Shown.
Please revise the table in Schedule.
11. Engineering Drawings Typical Cross Section: (i) As per MORTH circular RW/NH-29023/02/2019-S&R (P&B) dated
Median Width 1.1.2020, no raised/kerb median shall be provided in open country of NH
whereas in case of narrow medians (2m or less wide), new jersey type
concrete crash barrier shall be used along with the antiglare screen.
(ii) As per this circular, the MBCB has to be provided if raised median is
provided and as per IRC:119, MBCB is to be provided in the median if
median width is less tan 9m and traffic is more than 20000 PCU
The median width is less than 9m in this project and traffic seems more than
20000 PCU hence the Thrie Beam is to be provided throughout the project
and it will be about 100k=m in length.
Please clarify.
12. Schedule C, Clause 2(b) (iv) Typical Cross Section: Around 10km length of Thrie beam Crash Barrier is mentioned in Schedule C
Thrie Beam Crash Barrier whereas locations has not been given and also not shown in the Typical
Cross sections not shown. Kindly provide the locations.
13. Engineering Drawings Plan & Profile Please confirm whether the Vertical Profile is designed for SSD or ISD, as in

Page 5 of 10
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP
14. Engineering Drawings
15. Clause 7.2 Schedule-B
16. Clause 7.2(d) of Schedule-B
& Engineering Drawings
17. Clause 7.2(d) part-I of
Schedule-B & Engineering
Drawings
18. Engineering Drawings
19. Clause 7.4.2 of Schedule-B
20. Clause 7.3.2 of Schedule-B
21. Engineering Drawing
22. Engineering Drawing
Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
some sections (e.g Ch. 123.620) K value satisfies the minimum criteria for
Hog Curve (L>S case) for ISD case, while at some sections (e.g Ch.129.935)
K value satisfies the minimum criteria for Hog Curve (L>S case) for SSD
case.
Plan & Profile Please depict earthwork/ Day-Light lines in Plan as it will clarify the PROW
details.
Details of Culverts In the table the height of the Box culverts has not been mentioned. As per
Good Engineering Practice and evaluation of the project, pl. provide the
height of the Box Culverts.
The Scheme of Culverts In Schedule B the Box Culvert at Ch. 122+140 is under new construction
given in the Schedule-B & whereas in P&P it is shown for reconstruction. There are ambiguities about
P&P drawings are not the culverts at Ch. 136+035 & 137+095 also. Pl. clarify.
matching
Details of Culverts (i) In the table the height of the Box culverts has not been mentioned
however in P&P drawings height is given. As per Good Engineering
Practice and evaluation of the project, pl. provide the height of the Box
Culverts.
(ii) The Sizes of the culverts in Schedule-B & P&P drawings are not
matching. Pl. clarify
Miscellaneous Drawing Layout of pick up Bus Bay is not in accordance with IRC 80-2022. Kindly
Clarify.
Details of ROB Kindly Provide the Railway Approved GAD of ROB at Ch. 145+915 for
estimation
Details of Bridges Kindly Provide the Irrigation Approved Canal GAD's for Bridges at Ch.
113+830 , 118+865 , 119+995, 120+290 and 141+100 for Estimation.
Kindly clarify, if clearances from the Irrigation department have been
obtained, if so kindly provide.
Mismatch in FRL In Plan and profile for minor bridge at ch. 118+865, FRL of 107.206 and
structure in 41 degree skew is shown while in DPR GAD, FRL of
112.300 and structure with zero degree skew is shown. Kindly clarify.
Mismatch in Wearing Coat In some GAD of bridges, 65mm thick CC wearing coat is mentioned while in
Page 6 of 10
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries
23. Clause 5.3 a (ii) of Schedule The design traffic is
B mentioned for the following
sections:
Km 123+950 to Km
130+500 (120 msa)
NH- 731A to NH-731AG
(2.80Km) & Pahari section
(3.13Km) (40 msa).
24. Clause 5.3 a (ii) b of For New Construction Main
Schedule B Road sections (with
Geocell) (Km 128+500 to
130+500)
25. Clause 5.3 a (ii) f of Design Traffic of 5645
Schedule B CVPD for rigid pavement
design.
26. Clause 5.3 a (i) & Clause Design CBR
5.3.1 of Schedule B
27. Dumbbell
At Grade Junction
28. Service Road & Slip Road
Drawings
29. Entry & Exit of MCW & Sr.
Road
Page 7 of 10
Our Comments / Clarifications Required
some GAD's 65mm thick wearing coat comprising 40mm BC and 25mm
Mastic asphalt is shown. kindly confirm
As the project road is from Km 112+950 to Km 147+200. What is the
minimum design traffic for other stretches?
Is the Geocell implied to subgrade stabilization or granular layer
reinforcement? If it is for Granular layer reinforcement can contractor use
geogrid also in place of Geocell as that will provide good reinforcement and
are more tested than Geocell.
Is this being the design lane traffic (25% of total traffic) or the total traffic of 4
lane project road?
Clause 5.3 a (i) states that the Contractor shall design the pavement for
design CBR of 8% minimum whereas clause 5.3.1 states that Pavement
shall be designed for a minimum design period of 20 Years for flexible
pavement and 30 years for rigid pavement by considering maximum 8% of
CBR. Is CBR to be considered minimum 8% or Maximum 8% because in
case of minimum CBR, contractor can use soil having CBR more than 8% if
available?
Kindly Confirm ROW acquired or still to be acquired
Kindly provide P&P drawings of Service road & Slip Road
Weaving length not as per standards
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
30. Minor Junction Missing on LHS at DC:113+610, 114+350, DC:128+050, DC:135+300,
DC:136+050, DC:140+600,
Missing on RHS at DC:117+930, DC:128+050, DC: 138+000(to Village
Ludhwara), DC:140+600, DC:143+400, DC:145+000,
DC: 116+080 shall be 116+980
DC: 125+700 shall be 126+000(Pahari Bypass Start)

137+700 Start of Chitrakoot Bypass junction shall be Major Junction similar

to 139+200.
31. Minor Junction for Limb Missing at DC:3+800, DC:5+950,
Road
32. Major Junction 112+950 at Grade Junction missing in Plan
Kindly clarify
33. Builtup area 118+875 to 119+ 990 , no access provided
34. 5.4 of Schedule B Reconstruction of Table shows nil whereas in TCS-5 it is written that the existing road to be
Stretches dismantled up to GSB Level.– Kindly clarify
35. Clause 11, Schedule-B Details of RE Wall Ch: 145+951 to 146+605 shows a length of 2616m, kindly clarify
36. Engineering Drawing Mismatch in P&P and GAD There are mismatches in the skew angle mentioned in the GAD’s and plan
profile for bridges/Structures at Ch. 113+830, 114+215, 116+980 , 118+865,
120+290, 123+620, 133+080, 143+430, 145+055, 5+090 & 7+290 while in
schedule B, the skew angles not mentioned the structures/bridges. Kindly
clear which skew angle shall be used.
37. Engineering Drawing Mismatch in P&P and GAD Deck Width of MNB at Ch. 130+535 shown in the GAD do not match with
highway plan and also TCS no. 5 at this location does not match with the
design plan. Kindly provide us the revised TCS-5 and revised GAD of bridge
at ch. 130+535.
38. Clause 6 of Schedule-C Provision of Utility Duct As per Schedule-C, Utility duct of 300mm dia pipe has been proposed at

Page 8 of 10
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
every 500m throughout the project length, whereas in Manual IRC:SP:84, it
is given in Built-up section only.
Pl. look in to it.
39. Cost estimation Cost estimation is done on which year prices?

40. Hydrology If the length of the bridge increases / decreases due to hydrological
conditions, shall it will be considered as change of scope –Kindly clarify
41. 19.10 (iv) (d) of EPC AO = The wholesale price In AO reference is made for
Agreement index as published by the “Manufacture of machinery for mining, quarrying and construction”,
Ministry of Commerce & where as in AI reference is made for Construction Machinery.
Industry, Government of
India (hereinafter called
Please clarify the above references made for considering Wholesale Price
“WPI”) for “Manufacture of
Index for Base Date and the months three months prior to month to which the
machinery for mining,
IPC relates.
quarrying and construction”
for the month of the Base
Date.
AI = The WPI for
construction machinery for
the month three months
prior to the month to which
the IPC relates.
42. 19.10 (iv) (d) of EPC LO = The consumer price Circle is left blank, it may be defined.
Agreement index for industrial workers
for the [circle ******* in the
State of Uttar Pradesh],
published by Labour
Bureau, Ministry of Labour,
Government of India,
(hereinafter called “CPI”)
for the month of the Base

Page 9 of 10
Sl. No. Clause No. as per RFP Point of Queries Our Comments / Clarifications Required
Date.
43. Sch-K of EPC Agreement 2 (i) Physical tests shall The blank space may be filled with test names.
include [***].

Page 10 of 10