Interchanges. The choice of type of interchange rests on a number of factors related to the use of simple layouts that ensure that traffic demands are met and that order and harmony are maintained. “
Interchanges. DB Contractor shall design and construct the interchanges as shown in the Schematic Design and described below:
Interchanges. The details of interchanges are given in Table A-8. Table A-8 List of Interchanges X.Xx. Existing Chainage Type of Inter change Type of Super Structure Type of Sub Structure Type of Foundation Span Arrangement of Main Structure Vertical Clearance Overall Width Nil
Interchanges. Threshold PA CO concentration levels for the interchange configuration were analyzed using the MOVES and CAL3QHC models, with a combination of the grade separated intersection and freeway separated at various distances. A variable number of freeway lanes (even number of lanes ranging from 2 -12 lanes) were simulated. Likewise, various distances from the edge of the nearest freeway travel lane to the edge of the nearest travel lane of the interchange ramp (20, 30, 60, 80, 100, 125, 150, 175, 300, 500 and 1,000 feet) were simulated. The roadway link connecting the freeway to the intersection was modeled at skew angles of 90-, 60-, and 45-degree angles. Intersections were considered on either side of the freeway. Figure 9 shows the layout of the interchange for a 90-degree skew angle and with the intersection on the right side of the freeway. This modeling combines the impacts from the freeway and intersection modeling to determine the CO contribution for an interchange project for any given combination of the modeled number of freeway lanes and distances from the freeway to the interchange. That is, two separate modeling applications were conducted, and the results combined. Due to the skew angle, receptors for each cannot simply be added based on distance between the facility types. The results shown here represent a combination of the two facility types that considered receptor location, geometry (skew, left/right orientation, and distance between the facilities), road grade, setting (urban or rural) and wind directions in an R-based program that combined CAL3QHCR results with appropriate pairing and determined the overall peak concentrations from the combined facilities. Grade effects for the interchange were modeled for the non-freeway portion of the interchange from ±0 to ±7 percent grade. The total of the freeway contribution, intersection contribution, and background are to be directly compared to the CO NAAQS. Figure 9 - Interchange Configuration with Nearby Freeway and Intersection/Ramp Layout As the modeled concentrations may be considered conservatively high estimates for interchanges without adjacent intersections, given that intersection contributions to near-road concentrations are included along with the interchange contributions in the modeling for this PA and TSD, the modeling may serve as a conservative means to screen such projects. Similarly, and given the substantial safety margin afforded by the use of multiple worst-case modeling assum...
Interchanges. Tables A-3 (a), (b), and (c) show the one-hour CO concentrations for interchange scenarios that, with national-level (not Virginia-specific) conservative and worst-case modeling assumptions including the assumed 8-hour CO background level and persistence factor, do not produce modeled concentrations that would cause or contribute to an exceedance of the 8-hour CO ambient air standard (NAAQS). Although intersections were considered on either side of the freeway, Tables A-3(a) to (c) only report the higher of these. The same speed limitations for freeways and arterials from above also apply here. As the modeled concentrations may be considered conservatively high for interchanges without adjacent intersections, given that intersection contributions to near-road concentrations are included along with the interchange contributions in the modeling for this and TSD, the tables may serve as a conservative means to screen such projects. Similarly, and given the substantial safety margin afforded by the use of multiple worst-case modeling assumptions as summarized below, the tables may also serve as a conservative means to screen freeway-freeway (free-flow) interchanges. The intersection geometry is the same as in the intersection case, with six lanes on each approach (4 approach, 2 left turn) and 4 departure lanes, with grades from 0 to 7 percent. This is a conservative approach for this type of project because freeway interchanges generally have a one- or two-lane ramp approaching or departing from the intersection. The freeway was modeled at a 0% grade. Both rural and urban locations were modeled. The table columns represent varying distances from the edge of the nearest freeway travel lane to the edge of the nearest parallel roadway. For the 90-degree skew case, this is also the length of the interchange ramp. The table rows represent the setting (urban or rural), varying numbers of travel lanes on the freeway, and the skew angle of the interchange ramp.
Interchanges. Any point that has ramps or roadways that access or exit the through lanes on the freeway where FOC will locate all fiber optic cable corridor components as described in the definition of Fiber Optic Cable Corridor.
Interchanges. The choice of type of interchange rests on a number of factors related to the use of simple layouts that ensure that traffic demands are met and that order and harmony are maintained. here relates to those aspects that help road users anticipate the way in which similar movements will take place in traffic, even if the type of interchange differs. Indicated below are some of the important engineering characteristics of interchanges. Other characteristics are defined in accordance with known engineering practices. These characteristics can be summed up as follows:
Interchanges. The government intends to award a purchase order without interchanges with respective vendors/quoters. The government however, reserves the right to conduct interchanges if deemed in its best interest. Under appropriate circumstances, interchanges can be an effective method to improve the Government's evaluation of Offerors' quoted approaches and may reduce acquisition cycle time. Interchanges may be written, email, phone call, etc., or any method which would accurately capture the contemporaneous sharing of information between the Government and the Offerors. Interchanges may also be oral conversations between the Government and the Offerors. Clauses and Provisions Incorporated by Reference 52.204-7 System for Award Management OCT 2018 52.204-13 System for Award Management Maintenance OCT 2018 52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting JUL 2016 52.204-18 Commercial and Government Entity Code Maintenance JUL 2016 52.204-24 Representation Regarding Certain Telecommunications and AUG 2019 Video Surveillance Services or Equipment 52.204-25 Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and AUG 2019 Video Surveillance Services or Equipment 52.212-1 Instructions to Offers – Commercial Items OCT 2018 52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items OCT 2014 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions – Commercial Items OCT 2018 52.225-18 Place of Manufacture AUG 2018 52.232-18 Availability of Funds APR 1984 52.232-23 Assignment of Claims MAY 2014 52.232-39 Unenforceability of Unauthorized Obligations JUN 2013 52.232-40 Providing Accelerated Payments to Small Business Subcontractors DEC 2013 52.247-34 FOB Destination NOV 1991 52.249-1 Termination for Convenience of the Government – Fixed Price APR 1984 252.203-7000 Requirements Relating To Compensation of Former DoD Officials SEP 2011 252.203-7002 Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights SEP 2013 252.203-7005 Representation Relating to Compensation of Former DoD Officials NOV 2011 252.204-7006 Billing Instructions OCT 2005 252.204-7015 Notice of Authorized Disclosure of Information for Litigation Support MAY 2016 252.223-7008 Prohibition of Hexavalent Chromium JUN 2013 252.225-7001 Buy America and Balance of Payments Program-Basic DEC 2017 252.225-7002 Qualifying Country Sources as Subcontractors DEC 2017 252.232-7003 Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving Reports DEC 2018 252.232-7010 Levies on Contract Payments DEC 2006 252.244-7000 Subcontracts for Commercial Items and ...
Interchanges. It is the Government’s intent to award without interchanges. The Government may consider, throughout the evaluation, the “correction potential” of any quotes to this BPA solicitation. The judgment of such “correctional potential” is within the sole discretion of the Government and may be held with all, some or none of the Quoters. If any aspect of an Offeror’s quote does not meet the Government’s requirements and is not considered correctable, the offer will be ineligible for a BPA award. The Government may determine one or a few Quoters have the highest potential to provide the best value to the Government. The Government may conduct interchanges with those Quoters that, at the discretion of the Contracting Officer, have the highest potential to represent the best value. These interchanges may address technical or price matters, and any required BPA documentation including any other matter in the evaluation process. Resolution of minor or clerical issues would not constitute interchanges and the Government reserves the right to award the BPAs without the opportunity to revise quotes.
Interchanges. The Government reserves the right to hold interchanges if during the evaluation, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Interchanges are fluid interaction(s) between the KO and the contractors that may address any aspect of the proposal and may or may not be documented in real time. Upon receipt of the proposal(s), the KO may: Open interchanges or negotiate with one, some, or all contractors providing proposals; Issue a task order based upon the original proposal(s) furnished; Reject the proposal(s), or Cancel the requirement. If interchanges are held, Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will not be requested, unless expressly identified in writing by the KO at the conclusion of discussions. Offerors shall therefore provide their best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint with their initial submission.
