127EAV26Q0013 Questions Smokey Bear Ranger District Facilities Condition Assessment.pdf

127EAV26Q0013 Smokey Bear Ranger District Facilities Condition Assessment (1158273)

Questions

1. Lifecycle Reporting Duration

Is there a preferred number of years for lifecycle or capital planning projections within the Facilities Condition Assessment (e.g., 5-year, 10-year, or other)?

The Government prefers a 10 year life cycle and capital planning horizon with emphasis on near term 0-5 priorities and long term forecasting for asset sustainability.

2. Well System Assessment Scope

For the compound water system and well house, is a visual and functional assessment with budget-level repair/replacement estimates sufficient, or is a more detailed inspection (e.g., specialist evaluation) expected?

A comprehensive assessment is expected, including visual and functional evaluation, review of system components ( pumps, control, storage, piping, discharge area), we would need a specialist input on water testing, treatment, life span projection, we would need a cost estimate with consideration of repair vs replacement options.

3. Sewer/Septic System Assessment

Should the assessment of sewer or septic systems be limited to general condition and functionality, or are detailed inspections (e.g., specialist involvement) required?

Assessment should include general condition and functionality, evaluation of system capacity and performance, specialists’ consultation where warranted and identification of regulatory and environmental risks.

4. Level of Detail for Cost Estimates

Are cost estimates expected to be order-of-magnitude (ROM) estimates for planning purposes, or detailed engineer-level estimates?

Cost estimates should be developed at a refined planning level, more detailed than ROM, based on quantity take-offs where feasible, sufficient to support capital budgeting decisions on a year to year bases for a ten year time frame.

5. Building Conditions Have any of the subject buildings experienced fire damage and/or are currently unoccupied?

Buildings may include a mix of occupied and unoccupied structures, potentially damaged or deteriorated facilities, the contractor should fully document condition variability and impacts on lifecycle costs.

6. Flooding History Has flooding at the site historically caused damage to any facilities? It is understood there may have been significant rainfall/flooding in recent years.

The contractor is expected to evaluate historical and potential flood impacts, identify vulnerabilities to future flood events, and provided mitigation recommendations, cedar creek runs along the side of the office as well as flooding from hill sides surrounding the compound.

7. Cost Estimating Methodology (Pages 5–6) For development of deficiency cost estimates, does the Government require the use of a standardized cost database (e.g., RSMeans), or is the use of firm-based historical cost data and market experience acceptable?

A consistent and defensible methodology is required preferably using industry standard data bases such as RSMeans, supplemented with regional and firm specific data.

8. Report Requirements (Page 6)

a. Can the Government elaborate on the expected level of detail for “lifecycle data and lifecycle cost model”?

b. Can the Government clarify the distinction between “Current Replacement Value (CRV) or cost” and “Facilities Replacement Cost (FRC)”? Our understanding is that CRV reflects a building-only replacement value, while FRC may include broader project costs. Please confirm or clarify how each should be developed for this project.

Life cycle cost model includes major systems components, remaining useful life, phased replacement strategies escalation assumptions, the CRV is the building replacement cost, FRC is the fully burdened replacement including site, utilities soft costs and contingencies.

Depending on the cost analysis and consultation with the forest engineer to determine building value determinations.

9. Schedule / Milestones Are there any required milestone dates for completion of site visits, draft deliverables, or final report submission beyond the overall contract duration?

The contractor should plan for interim progress updates preferred weekly, draft report submission, final report incorporation government comments.

10. Professional Engineer (PE) Certification Can the Government clarify what is required under the “certify and review deliverables” requirement? For example, is a signed/sealed certification letter sufficient, and is the PE expected to provide an oversight review versus detailed engineering analysis?

A professional engineer PE is required to provide active technical oversight, review and validate all findings, apply engineering judgement, certify deliverables where applicable.

11. Structural Analysis Requirements Are structural calculations or detailed structural analyses required as part of this effort?

A full structural design is not required, however the contractor should perform enhance structural observations, identify potential deficiencies, conduct analytical checks where concerns arise, such areas of concern will be the Ruidoso look out tower.

12. Screening / Assessment Tools Is there a requirement to perform building sketch-ups, rapid screening assessments, or utilize specific tools (e.g., FEMA P-154, RVS), or is this left to the Contractor’s methodology?

The contractor is encouraged to utilize industry standard tools such as screening methods, digital assessment platforms, building sketch ups and system inventories.

13. Report Format The Statement of Work indicates that the Facilities Condition Assessment Report may be provided either as individual reports or as a single consolidated report with dedicated sections per facility. Can the Government confirm its preferred format for deliverables, or if offerors may propose their recommended approach?

The preferred format is a comprehensive consolidated report including facility specific sections, supporting appendices, data tables and cost models.

14. Scope of Assessment vs. Engineering Analysis Section 3.0 (Technical Requirements) includes several items that may extend beyond the typical scope of a Facilities Condition Assessment as defined by ASTM standards, which are generally limited to non-destructive, visual assessments. Specifically, items such as hazardous materials surveys (lead/asbestos), erosion and flood protection analysis, and evaluation of the existing well and potential connection to the Village of Ruidoso water system may require detailed engineering evaluations and/or specialty subconsultants.

15. Can the Government clarify whether these items are intended to be addressed at a high-level observational basis with recommendations for further study, or if comprehensive engineering analysis (including calculations and/or testing) is required? Additionally, please clarify if this level of analysis is expected for all facilities or only select buildings.

The government wants all studies, calculations and testing to be established and conducted on this contract. High level is expected on all facilities, and through out the compound.

16. Study Period The Statement of Work indicates the assessment will support planning for the next five (5) years. Can the Government confirm whether a 5-year study period is intended for lifecycle modeling and capital planning, or if a longer-term planning horizon is desired?

A min. of 5 year planning period is required with extended projections up to 10 years is strongly encouraged.

17. Section L.4 (b) Key Personnel

Would the government accept a certified ASTM and ASU Facility Assessor with 40 years of experience in the field rather than a Professional Engineer?

A licensed PE is required for this contract. Any state PE will be accepted.

18. 1. Page 1 of the Solicitation in box 20 lists a Delivery of 05/15/2026 but page 3 Schedule of Items lists a performance period of 60 days. Can you please clarify the Performance Period.

The performance period is 60 days, the contractor should anticipate intensive coordination and parallel task execution to meet requirements.

19. Would award of this project exclude the Design Professional from pursuing future work on these sites that may be a result of this assessment?

Future work eligibility will be evaluated in accordance with organizational conflict of interest regulations.

20. Are there as-builts or existing drawings for these sites? If so can you please list for which of the identified structures these exist.

There are no current existing drawings of buildings, there is partial water system drawing.

21. Can the team visit the facilities multiple times if selected for the assessment?

Multiple site visits are expected and may be necessary to the contract.

22. The solicitation mentions that the professional requirement is to be a licensed PE, is a licensed Architect acceptable to prime this project?

A professional engineering license is required.

23. 6. Page 4 of the statement of work letter “l. If needed, non destructive testing may be per”, please confirm this is to say performed.

Per = performed

24. Page 4 of the statement of work letter “m. Environmental (hazardous materials, lead and asbestos Surveys)”. Please elaborate on this requirement. Is lab testing Needed? ASTM process states Environmental matters such as asbestos and lead are out of scope.

The contractor should conduct visual assessment of potential hazards materials identify suspect materials , and conduce sampling and testing where warranted to validate.

25. 8. Of page 7 of the statement of Work:

Compound parking lots/ driveways / sidewalks and 12. Compound water system, well house and tank are listed. What are these and what is to be evaluated?

The facilities are mostly on one compound that contains sidewalks, large parking lots, staging areas, drainage areas, ponding area, contractor will do a condition evaluation, functional performance.

26. What is the extent of inspection/assessment expected for the lookout tower? Is a general inspection of systems and observed deficiencies from the ground level and stairs sufficient?

A comprehensive assessment, including roof condition, stairs, interior issues, structural deficiencies. Safety concerns and identification of structural deficiencies.

27. Can you please elaborate on the level of assessment/analysis needed for the domestic water supply? Well vs connection to village of Ruidoso water system.

Provide assessment of existing system conditions and capacity, then do a comparative evaluation of well system vs connection to Ruidoso water system, utilizing high level cost and feasibility considerations, as well as steps, process and contacts for the FS to connect to the water system.

28. Can you provide any clarification to what is required for the Compound water system, well house, and tank and how this all relates to the "Tanker Bay" or any filling station of the trucks.

Compound utilized fire engines, contract determine amount of water to fill tanks to fs standards if feasible with interconnection.

29. RFQ 5.0 B. , page 7

Are the Qualicty control plan, organizational chart post and all the deliverables from this requirement post award?

Resumes, PE licensing number, subcontract contact information and responsibilities are needed during the contract period after it is granted to proceed.

30. RFQ, M.2, page 20

The Government will use a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection process. In our experience, a Professional Engineer (PE) has not been required to complete high quality results for this work. Would the government consider removing the PE requirement so that offerors may provide the most cost-effective quote?

The PE requirement remains mandatory to ensure technical quality and accountability.

31. General

Will the government confirm that the Professional Engineer's (PE) function it to solely provide oversight to the facility condition assessment team of professionals and certification of documents?

The purpose of the PE is to provide technical oversight and quality assurance, review and validate facility condition data, ensure compliance with engineering standards and safety, certify or stamp documents when needed, and support interpretation of findings and engineering judgment. But the PE is not automatically limited to just oversight of the team nor documentation certification.

The PE is expected to provide oversight, technical input, validation, certification.

32. RFQ, B.1, Page 3

The Period of Performance can impact the amount of resources and people needed to complete the FCA. Will the government confirm that the entire Period of Performance from first day of assessment to the delivery of the Facilities Condition Assessment Report is to be 60 days?

The period of performance is defined in the solicitation and resulting contract. The time of deliverables is stated in the contract, and it applies to the full scope of the work from initiation of the field assessment through delivery of the final facilities condition assessment report.

Confirmed all phases and contract be completed in 60 days.

33. RFQ, L.3, Page 19

Instructions advise that resumes are excluded from page count. What if any resumes should be included in the response?

Key personnel, relevant supporting staff, Engineers,

34. RFQ, L.4(b), page 19

Will the government confirm that only the Licensed Professional Engineer is considered Key Personnel?

At min. a licensed PE , however additional personnel may be identified as key based on role criticality , such as expects in fields ( HVAC, Electrical, Structural)