12445124B0020 Questions Asked as of 09052024.doc
DOC document 101 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 12445124B0020
- Issued by
-
Department of Agriculture Forest Service
About this file
This document contains a questions and answers matrix related to a federal invitation for bid (IFB) for the Spring Lake Dam (SLD) Pedestrian Walkway Improvements project. The solicitation, number 12445124B0020, is a total small business set-aside valued between $250,000 and $500,000. It is issued by the Department of Agriculture Forest Service for work to replace the existing concrete walkway, improve safety features, replace a potable waterline, and rehabilitate the existing dam stone masonry piers. Key details include:
- A site visit is scheduled for 08/23/2024 and the last day for questions is 09/05/2024, with bids due by 09/18/2024.
- The period of performance is 270 days, negotiable.
- Bidders had various questions answered regarding construction methods, materials, site access, and existing conditions that will inform their proposals.
- Preliminary engineering reports from 2021 and 1937 drawings are available as supplemental data.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
COMMENTS MATRIX FOR USDA-FS ISSUANCES: 12445124B0020 WALKWAY
(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 |
8/26/2024
Bidder Comment: Will there be an engineer on site at all times? Do we need to provide an engineer onsite?
Resolution: No. Disregard general note #2 on plan sheet 2.
8/26/2024
Bidder Comment: What solution should be used for cleaning mortar joints?
Resolution: No specific solution is identified in the plans (SP 814).
Submit planned materials in Plan of Operations.
08/26/2024
Bidder Comment: What are the dates the campground is closed?
Resolution: Memorial Day to Labor Day.
Bidder Comment: What is the load bearing for the edge beams? Are the vertical or lateral load bearing values known for the piers?
Resolution: Per feasibility study; A concrete compressive strength of 2.1 ksi was utilized as it was the lowest value for the support beams from
NDT’s report without delamination & the support beams are in fair condition, which corresponds to a condition factor of 0.95.
Pier load bearing values are unknown.
Bidder Comment: Are the boat ramps available for use?
Resolution: Yes. Submit as part of Operations Plan.
Bidder Comment: Is cleaning of the piers required?
Resolution: Only in repaired areas.
Bidder Comment: Can power tools be used to remove existing joints?
Resolution: Removal of mortar from joints shall be accomplished using hand tools and small pneumatically powered chisels. (SP 814)
Bidder Comment: Is the entire walkway to be removed?
Resolution: Per the plans the entire walkway, including abutment, are to be removed. Edge beams are to remain.
Bidder Comment: Can angle iron be mounted to the edge beams to support forms/ concrete pours?
Resolution: Per feasibility study; A concrete compressive strength of 2.1 ksi was utilized as it was the lowest value for the support beams from
NDT’s report without delamination & the support beams are in fair condition, which corresponds to a condition factor of 0.95.
Bidder Comment: Is lead present in the joints of the existing waterline.
Resolution: Unknown. Will contact the water department for this specific installation.
Bidder Comment: How high on the piers will the repointing be?
Resolution: Repointing areas will be indicated on the plans or as directed by the COR. Areas near or below the apparent flow line will have priority.
Bidder Comment: Do the capstones around the gate control box need to be replaced?
Resolution: Yes.
Bidder Comment: Are there preliminary engineering reports available to post to SAM?
Resolution: Yes. 2021 Feasibility Study, 2021 Top Side Inspection, and
1937 Drawings. (SEE BELOW)
Bidder Comment: Is the 600 sq ft of repointing spread over all the piers or just three? Or do we need to get all of them?
Resolution: Repointing areas will be indicated on the plans or as directed by the COR. Areas near or below the apparent flow line will have priority.
Bidder Comment: How much grout to be injected, how much cubic yards?
Resolution: The specific amount is unknown.
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
Bidder Comment: SEE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
· Supplemental Data SLD 1937 Drawing
· Supplemental Data SLDW Feasibility Study 6-23-21
· Supplemental Data SLDW Top Side Inspection v2
· 12445124B0020_Walkway Site Visit_Attendance Log
Email 08/30/2024
Bidder Comment: Section H.1 (Clauses), Part 452.228-71 identifies the required minimum insurance coverages for the Contractor working on the project. After review, there is no indication for the Contractor to maintain and provide proof of coverages relating to commercial marine insurance (i.e. USL&H Workers’ Compensation, Marine Employers Liability (MEL), Marine Liability, or Vessel Pollution).
Please advise if the Government will require these industry-standard coverages considering the project will require work on/over a body of water.
Resolution: DISCLAIMER- FS is not an insurance advisor! With that said, the FS does not typically require inland marine insurance. However, if your company determines that it is prudent to purchase based upon your construction approach to protect the interests of your company and the US Government, then include it with your bid pricing. (bonds, insurance, mobilization).
Additional Information
Bidder Comment: BID BOND IS REQUIRED Resolution: 20% of bid NTE $3m whichever is less
Bidder Comment:
Resolution:
Bidder Comment:
Bidder Comment:
Bidder Comment:
Bidder Comment:
Bidder Comment:
Bidder Comment:
Bidder Comment:
Bidder Comment:
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.
PAGE
SD FORM 818, JAN 09
PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .