12414619R0001_v3_Culvert_Question_Matrix_7-1-19.pdf

COMMENTS MATRIX FOR USDA-FS ISSUANCES: 12414619R0001 Culvert Replacement

(Please read instructions on back before completing form.)

# CLASS

COMPONENT AND

POC NAME, PHONE,

AND E-MAIL

PAGE PARA COMMENT

TYPE (C/S) COMMENTS, JUSTIFICATION, AND ORIGINATOR JUSTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION

A/ R/ P

SD FORM 818, JAN 09 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE

Email Question

6-21-19 S

Bidder Comment: Do we need to do anything thru SAM to bid on the project? Is there another website that we need to download the official bid documents? We have downloaded the 143 page Specifications thru Construct Connect. The specification seems to have specs, drawings, Geotech, and Solicitation. Is there anything else we need to do?

Resolution: All proposal documents are uploaded on FBO to include the SF-1442 for your proposal. . Ensure you complete the Reps and Certs within the solicitation and they are current in Sam.gov.

• So you should have: SF1442; RFP solicitation, and then the attachments

Email Question

6-23/24-19 S

Bidder Comment: Will you please be so kind to send me the co-ordinates for the site meeting

Resolution: Meeting Location is the Talladega Ranger District Office 1001 North St E, Talladega, AL 35160

Call-In Before traveling to the site:

1-888-844-9904 Access Code: 9178016

Date and Time: 27 June 2019; 1100hrs CST

6-25-19 C Bidder Comment: dimension of the headwall is blurred / smeared (drawings)

Resolution: CLARIFICATION OF DIMENSION _ Drawing Attached 6-25-19

6-29-19

Bidder Comment: I was the only person there at that time. Was there something I missed

Resolution: No. Previous comment matrix reflected meeting location at the district office followed by the site visit.

# CLASS

COMPONENT AND

POC NAME, PHONE,

AND E-MAIL

PAGE PARA COMMENT

TYPE (C/S) COMMENTS, JUSTIFICATION, AND ORIGINATOR JUSTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION

A/

Email Question

6-29-19 C

Bidder Comment: In attachment 3 on page 8 it suggests a soil strength of 3,00PSF, then on page 9 the proposed footer size is 2x3 using the HL 93 loads. However it seems like this footer (2x3) is way too small for the soil bearing capacity for the induced HL 93 loads.

What should the contractor use as a given, the suggested footer size of 2 x3 ft or the HL 93 loads? Please advise.

Resolution: Design base off of the HL 93 load

6-29-19 C

Bidder Comment: The bid list calls for ±2885 CY of embankment fill. What is the source of this material? (on or off site?)

Resolution: Off Site

6-29-19 C

Bidder Comment: Confirm that the road may be totally closed for the construction period.

Resolution: Yes, the road will be totally closed during construction

6-29-19 C

Bidder Comment: The dewatering is up to the contractor. Can trees be removed to create a diversion channel?

Resolution: No, this was not addressed in the NEPA.

6-29-19 C

Bidder Comment: Can the broken up concrete rubble be used as riprap? (permanently or temporarily)

Resolution: No, the existing concrete cannot be used as riprap.

Site Visit Conference

6-27-19

Bidder Comment: What are the coordinates for the site?

Resolution: 33*12’05.2”N 86*07’45.9”W

Bidder Comment: Can we go to the site on our own and it is marked?

Resolution: Yes, you can go on your own. The site will be marked with flags. THE FLAGS

HAVE NO ENGINEERING RELEVANCE AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PROPOSAL

INFORMATION.

# CLASS

COMPONENT AND

POC NAME, PHONE,

AND E-MAIL

PAGE PARA COMMENT

TYPE (C/S) COMMENTS, JUSTIFICATION, AND ORIGINATOR JUSTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION

A/

Bidder Comment: Is it correct that the spec reference Fed Highway Standards?

Resolution: Yes. The project uses Highway funding so the schedule/spec all correlate back to the Highway Standards.

Bidder Comment:

Resolution:

o Resolution:

# CLASS

COMPONENT AND

POC NAME, PHONE,

AND E-MAIL

PAGE PARA COMMENT

TYPE (C/S) COMMENTS, JUSTIFICATION, AND ORIGINATOR JUSTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION

A/

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING SD FORM 818

COORDINATING OSD COMPONENT: Use this form to provide consolidated critical and substantive comments to the OSD Component that originated the issuance. Complete the classification header and footer, columns 1 through 5, and the first two entries in column 6. REVIEW THE COMMENTS, RESOLVE ANY CONFLICTING VIEWS, AND CONFIRM THAT THE COMPLETED MATRIX ACCURATELY REPRESENTS YOUR COMPONENT’S POSITION. Upload the form to the DoD Directives Program Portal IN MICROSOFT WORD FORMAT, with a scanned copy of the sign SD Form 106, “DoD Directives Program Coordination Record,” or coordination memorandum.

ORIGINATING OSD COMPONENT: Use this form to consolidate comments from all coordinators and to record adjudication of the comments. (To add comments from an SD 818 submitted by a coordinator, use the “Copy” and “Paste” tools on the Microsoft Word Standard Toolbar.) When consolidating comments, place them in the order of the pages/paragraphs they apply to (e.g., all comments from all coordinators that apply to page 1, paragraph 1.a., should be grouped together as the initial entries; all comments that apply to page 1, paragraph 1.b., should be grouped together next, and so on). Complete column 7 and the third entry in column 6. Adjust the classification header and footer and columns 1 and 2 as appropriate.

CLASSIFICATION – Enter the highest classification of the comments. If all are unclassified, mark the header and footer accordingly and ignore the column.

COLUMN 1 – Enter the number of the comment. Enter comments in the order of the pages/paragraphs they apply to.

COLUMN 2 – Enter the classification of the comment. If all comments are unclassified, mark the header and footer accordingly and ignore the column.

COLUMN 3 – Enter the appropriate information.

COLUMN 4 – Enter the appropriate information.

COLUMN 5 – Enter the appropriate information.

COLUMN 6 – Enter the comment type. Place only one comment per row. Do NOT include administrative comments concerning non-substantive aspects of an issuance, such as dates of references, organizational symbols, and/or grammatical errors.

(C) CRITICAL: When a Component has one or more critical comments, that Component’s coordination shall reflect a nonconcur. THE JUSTIFICATION FOR CRITICAL COMMENTS

MUST IDENTIFY:

– Violations of the law or contradictions of Executive Branch policy or of policy established in DoD issuances. The GC, DoD, or his or her representative shall identify legal objections as critical comments.

– Unnecessary risks to safety, life, limb, or DoD materiel; waste or abuse of DoD appropriations; or imposition of an unreasonable burden on a Component’s resources.

(S) SUBSTANTIVE: Substantive comments are made when a section in the issuance appears to be or is potentially unnecessary, incorrect, misleading, confusing, or inconsistent with other sections, or when a Component disagrees with the proposed responsibilities, requirements, and/or procedures. A substantive comment is usually not sufficient justification for a Component to nonconcur on an issuance. Several substantive comments when taken together may be grounds for a nonconcurrence.

COLUMN 7 – COORDINATING COMPONENT: Enter the comment in the area provided. Enter your justification for the comment and your requested or recommended changes in the area provided.

YOU MUST PROVIDE CONVINCING SUPPORT FOR CRITICAL COMMENTS IN THE JUSTIFICATION.

– ORIGINATING COMPONENT: Enter your justification for disposition of the comment in the area provided. Include any related communications with the coordinating Component. You must provide convincing support for rejecting critical comments.

COLUMN 8 – Enter whether you accepted (A), rejected (R), or partially accepted (P) the comment. Your justification for disposition of the comment in column 6 must be consistent with this entry.