127EAX26R0006 R3 Roads QA6.docx

127EAX26R0006 R3 Roads MATOC Q&A #6

1. Regarding the AZ project we have the following question. We noticed that the Statement of Work provides travel directions approaching the project site from the east. However, Tusayan offers the most practical lodging accommodations for our crew.

Would there be any objection to our personnel accessing the project from the west via the South Entrance instead? If so, would our project vehicles be permitted to utilize the South Entrance Bypass Loop to avoid the daily visitor traffic lines and thereby eliminate the need to pay park entrance fees each day while traveling to and from the project site?

A: Yes, you maybe be able to utilize the South Entrance Bypass Loop upon coordination with NPS. Recommended primary access to the 310 is the use 302.

2. We conducted an independent site visit of the project area and appreciates the design intent to preserve the existing character of the Grandview Lookout area. During our visit, we observed numerous smaller trees and vegetation within or immediately adjacent to the proposed parking lot improvements. The contract drawings indicate that existing trees shown are to remain; however, the limits of vegetation management within the parking lot construction area are not fully defined.

As part of our commitment to minimizing unnecessary disturbance to the site, we would welcome the opportunity to salvage and relocate suitable smaller trees where practical, rather than remove healthy vegetation that could otherwise be preserved.

Please clarify: (photos attached)

a. Would the Government support the Contractor identifying suitable smaller trees for relocation within the project area, subject to approval by the Contracting Officer or COR, in lieu of removal where relocation is practical and does not interfere with the completed improvements?

A: Tree relocation is not required or necessary. The trees that are intended to be kept are shown on the plans. Contractor is required to dispose of the brush and smaller trees.

b. For vegetation that cannot reasonably be relocated, is the removal of shrubs and smaller trees located within the parking lot construction limits considered incidental to the parking lot improvements?

A: Yes, it is incidental to the parking lot improvements. No separate line item.

3. The contract documents require preservation of existing trees and reference tree protection measures adjacent to construction activities. If excavation or grading encounters root systems associated with trees designated to remain, please clarify the Government's expectations regarding acceptable root pruning, root protection, and construction methods necessary to avoid damage to retained trees.?

A: If shallow roots are encounted in the field of trees designated to remain, you will work with the COR to reduce the depth of clearing in that area. Acceptable root pruning methods will be left to the Contractors descrection.

4. The plans note that the boulder locations shown are relative and that final placement will be approved by the Contracting Officer. Should bidders assume the conceptual layout shown in the plans represents the intended overall quantity and extent of the barrier, with only minor field adjustments anticipated during construction?

A: Yes, plans represent intended quantity with only minor field adjusmtent of locations.

5. Is there a specific bid bond form you would like submitted for the 310/307 NFSR and Echo amphitheater projects?

A: Below pulled from Instruction to Offerors (c) Factor 4 – Price Proposal Instructions

v) Scanned copy of fully executed Bid Guarantee (Standard Form 24 and Power of Attorney).

6. Does the solicitation form include both projects? Is it the same form for both bids?

A: The solicitation includes both projects with the option to bid just one. You will need to sign the solicitation form if you intend to compete for an IDIQ. A bid on either project will require its own pricing included on the schedule of items document and its own bid bond.

image1.png image2.png