RFIs.pdf

Requests for Information Solicitation 1232SA25R0013

Question 1: Page 4 - General Note - 1F. - States modifying and extending ductwork for connection to the new ahu. Just confirming that all ductwork does not need to be replaced and this is just for a transition?

Answer 1: For AHU-3: All dashed ductwork is to be replaced.

For AHU-4: Ductwork replacement is limited to what is necessary to tie-in the new equipment to the existing.

Question 2: Page 3 - Mechanical Specifications - Ductwork - Air Handlers. Has a general statement of replacing ductwork but no start/stop.

Answer 2: See Question 1.

Question 3: Page 2 - From the provided drawings, ductwork appears as if it all needs to be replaced (dashed lines) and only shows AHU3 ductwork and no ductwork for

AHU4.

Answer 3: See Question 1.

Question 4: Page 3 - Mechanical Specifications - Ductwork - Exhaust Fans - Same question, general statements on replacement of ductwork no start/stop indicated.

Answer 4: See Question 5.

Question 5: Just confirming from the walkthrough that we are only replacing exhaust fans, no ductwork below roof, and the curb adapters (if needed) to be of stainless 304 or 316?

Answer 5: Correct, only replacing exhaust fans, no ductwork below roof, ALL curb adapters shall be replaced with 304 or 316 stainless steel (EF-4 shall be 316 stainless steel).

Question 6: Page 4 - General Notes - 1B. - New BMS controllers/sensors look to be completely replaced for each AHU. Confirming controls are of the Niagara 4 Supervisor?

Answer 6: Yes

Question 7: Page 4 - General Notes - 1B. - New BMS controllers/sensors look to be completely replaced for each AHU. Include integration to existing BMS?

Answer 7: Yes

Question 8: Page 4 - General Notes - 1B. - Is there a preferred controls contractor integrated with the facility currently?

Answer 8: Precision Controls of Indianapolis (a Havel company)

Question 9: Page 4 - General Notes - 1B. - If controls integration is needed, are graphics to be completed?

Answer 9: No

Question 10: Page 4 - General Notes - 1B. - If controls integration is needed, will supervisor/admin passwords be provided?

Answer 10: Access will be granted under the supervision of Government personnel.

Question 11: Page 4 - General Notes - 1C - Replace VFDs/Starts etc. - Is there a preference on what to be installed motor starter or VFD? Currently motor starter.

Answer 11: Motor starter.

Question 12: Safety & Security. Any additional safety or security requirements to be completed before and during project?

Answer 12: No

Question 13: Staging and parking. Will there be a staging area to store job boxes, equipment, material?

Answer 13: Yes, there will be space outside for staging some equipment. There can be space inside the building for staging JobBoxes. Parking will not be provided. Purdue parking map attached.

Question 14: Staging and parking. Will parking in the Nimitz Drive area be available?

Answer 14: Staging yes, parking no.

Question 15: Are we replacing the fan only or should we include all new roof top ductwork.

(#1, 12, 11 & 10).

Answer 15: Fan Only

Question 16: Please verity that new general exhaust fan can utilized existing curbs. We will provide an curb adapter if required.

Answer 16: Existing equipment curbs do not need to be reconstructed. See #5 regarding curb adapters.

Question 17: Is there a current warranty on the roof systems? If so, can you please provide the vendor who is carrying that warranty?

Answer 17: Copy of warranty attached.

Question 18: The Specifications do not provide any information for Temperature Controls.

Drawing #4 only states General notes. Who has the current contract for the building?

Answer 18: See Question 8.

Question 19: Specification section 232113-3.1-A. Hot Water piping is only welded or flanged joints. Whereas the “Products” section allows for threaded fittings. Please advise.

Answer 19: Threaded fittings are prohibited.

Question 20: Specification section 232113-3.1-B. Chilled water allows for Type L copper sweat. Can this same system be used for the heating water as well?

Answer 20: No

Question 21: Document #1 Shows AHU-3 having a chilled water coil. However there is no mention of any CWS/R going to existing AHU-3. If CW is required where would the tie-in be located and what size would the piping be that would supply AHU-3?

Answer 21: The chilled water coil was added later to AHU-3, which might explain why it is not on the original drawings. The CWS/R pipe is 2.5” OD steel pipe, (NOTE it is very rusted under the insulation) (~2” ID). The tie-in location should consider the quality of the pipe that is being tied-in to. Include the replacement of no more than 6’ of piping and insulation for each tie-in.

Question 22: Drawing #2 Fan Schedule shows F-4 is Base bid, however the Key Note #12 show it as Bid Option #3.

Answer 22: F-4 is Base Bid.

Question 23: The specifications do not contain a spec section specifically for building controls, but the drawings indicate to provide new controls for AHUs (see note 1.B under General Notes on sheet 4). Pictures taken at the site show a mixture of older generation and newer generation controls. Is there a building control spec available detailing the integration requirements of new controls? If not, please provide direction on required controls and integration.

Answer 23: No, see Question 8.

Question 24: Will the sign-in sheet from site visit be available in addendum?

Answer 24: Sign-in sheets attached.

Question 25: Please clarify if a superintendent can be a dual hat to cover the requirements of

SSHO?

Answer 25: The site superintendent MAY be allowed to fulfill additional roles so long as that individual meets all of the requirements of each of those roles and continuously demonstrates throughout the course of the contract that each of those roles are being performed satisfactorily.

Question 26: If no to the question above, will the SSHO need to be full-time for this project?

Answer 26: See Question 25.

Question 27: Please clarify if a superintendent can be a dual hat to cover the requirements of

QA/QC?

Answer 27: See Question 25.

Question 28: If no to the question above, will the QA/QC need to be full time for this project?

Answer 28: See Question 25.

Question 29: Can a superintendent be a triple hat to cover the requirements of SSHO and

QA/QC?

Answer 29: See Question 25.

Question 30: Will shutdowns be required to be done during off hours or weekends?

Answer 30: No

Question 31: Please provide make and model selection for booster pump associated with air handling unit?

Answer 31: A basis of design for each booster pump is not provided. A high efficiency pump is to be selected per the provided specifications that meets the flow rate and pressure requirements of the provided record drawings.

Question 32: Please advise what pipe hydronic pipe sizes are serving the air handling units.

Answer 32: If not shown on the drawings, assume 2” ID (2.5” OD).

Question 33: Are there any as-builts with duct and pipe size available for review?

Answer 33: The record drawings have been provided

Question 34: Please confirm if there is assumed asbestos on any piping or duct that is to be removed?

Answer 34: Asbestos abatement is not in scope.

Question 35: Will plant, mechanical rooms etc. be cleared of all stored debris prior to the contractor entering those areas?

Answer 35: Yes

Question 36: Will a full-time fire watch be required during activities such as cutting, brazing, and welding? How long after such activities are completed?

Answer 36: Hot work/burn permits are required. Please reach out to Jay Conner

(connerja@purdue.edu) to discuss the requirements associated with your specific means and methods. The current fee associated with supporting these activities is $63.09 per hour.

Question 37: Will any existing glycol be required to be removed and disposed of by the contractor? If so, can the total volume of glycol be provided?

Answer 37: Yes, but only to the extent necessary to accomplish the scope of work. Being that specific means & methods vary, this amount cannot be universally quantified. The hydronic system will need to have a minimum of 40% glycol upon completion.

Question 38: Please confirm the extent of any duct cleaning scope requirements if applicable.

Answer 38: Duct cleaning is not in scope.

mailto:connerja@purdue.edu

Question 39: Please confirm duct leakage test is required. Please confirm the extent of duct leakage testing? Will contractor be responsible for sealing of duct beyond fittings that were replaced to facilitate air handler replacement?

Answer 39: Duct air leakage test is required, limited to replaced ductwork. Contractor is not responsible for sealing of duct beyond that which was replaced.

Question 40: Please confirm if duct leakage test is required for exhaust systems that don’t call for any duct modifications.

Answer 40: Duct air leakage test is not required for exhaust systems that do no call for any duct modifications.

Question 41: Is there a particular vendor or contractor currently servicing and maintaining the

Building Automation System or Temperature Controls System?

Answer 41: See Question 8.

Question 42: Please confirm if we will be allowed to keep a locked storage container or conex box within the grounds.

Answer 42: Yes

Question 43: To allow sufficient time to review responses and prepare our bid we kindly request that you please extend the bid date.

Answer 43: Due date remains July 29.

Question 44: Section L.3 (Instructions for the Preparation of Proposals), volume 3 (Past

Performance), section a on page 35 of the solicitation reads: “Offerors shall provide a minimum of three and a maximum of five completed PPQ projects within the past four years as the prime contractor.” However, Section M.2 (Criteria for Evaluating Proposals), Evaluation Criteria, paragraph 2, page 39 reads: “Offerors should provide references for up to five similar contracts completed within the last two years.” Can the Government clarify which timeframe we should use?

Answer 44: Four years.

Question 45: Volume 2, Subfactor 2.2: Can the Offeror’s key personnel, to include Project

Manager, Site Superintendent, and Site Safety and Health Officer, be dual or triple hatted, or does this requirement need to be a different person for each key personnel?

Answer 45: See Question 25.

Question 46: Volume 3, section a. , page 35 indicates a PPQ is provided for the offerors to obtain past performance information, however we did not see an attachment or a PPQ included in the solicitation? Can the Government either send the appropriate form or indicate which form it would like us to use.

Answer 46: PPQ added as an attachment.

Question 47: Alternatively, would it be acceptable to submit previously completed PPQs from past projects as long as they are recent (within one year)?

Answer 47: Previously completed PPQs are acceptable as long as they meet the timeframes outlined in the solicitation.

Question 48: Also, can CPARs be submitted in lieu of PPQs?

Answer 48: CPARS evaluation can be submitted in lieu of PPQ as long as they meet the timeframes outlined in the solicitation.

Question 49: For Volume 3: Past Performance, page 35: Must the projects submitted be the same as those submitted under Volume 2, Subfactor 2.1 – Company Experience

(p. 34), or may different projects be proposed, provided they meet the stated requirements?

Answer 49: They do not need to be the same projects.

Question 50: Do projects presented for Past Performance and/or Experience need to be complete, or can they be ongoing and substantially complete (at least 50%)?

Answer 50: Must be complete.

Question 51: If projects need to be complete, would an active multi-year contract—such as a regional preventative maintenance and service contract or BPA with discrete, completed task orders—be considered compliant and relevant, provided it includes scopes of work that are directly applicable to the solicitation?

Answer 51: The completed task orders would be acceptable provided they meet the requirements in the solicitation.

Question 52: If ongoing contracts may be considered, are there specific parameters or documentation requirements (e.g., percent complete, interim evaluations, summary of completed work orders) that must be provided to demonstrate relevance and performance success?

Answer 52: Projects must be completed.

Question 53: Will the Government consider past performance examples from proposed subcontractors or team members, including those under an SBA-approved Mentor-Protégé Agreement, provided they played a significant role in the successful completion of the project?

Answer 53: Yes as long as there is documentation submitted that confirms the subcontractor or mentor will be used on this project.

Question 54: If subcontractor or Mentor-Protégé past performance is permitted, is a

Subcontractor Consent Form or Letter of Commitment required at the time of proposal submission? If so, is there a specific format or template the Government prefers?

Answer 54: Yes. No specific format.

Question 55: For projects performed by subcontractors or Mentor-Protégé entities, are there any specific labeling or formatting expectations (e.g., identification of prime vs.

sub role, duration of involvement, or dollar share) the Government requires within the Experience or Past Performance sections?

Answer 55: It needs to be clear which subcontractor or mentor the past performance is for.

Question 56: Would the Government accept a portion of a larger contract (e.g., a specific phase or scope element of a multi-phase project) as a stand-alone past performance example, provided it is relevant and clearly described in the submission?

Answer 56: Yes, as long as the phase is completed and meets the requirements in the solicitation.