Attachment_D_Questions_Responses_0002_0002.docx
DOCX document 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Inspect, test, and repair handicap fishing docks
- Solicitation number
- 140G0122Q0067
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140G0122Q0067_Amd_0002.pdf | ||
| Sol_140G0122Q0067_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| Attachment_B_Wage_Determination.pdf | ||
| Sol_140G0122Q0067.pdf | ||
| Attachment_C_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc | DOC document | |
| Attachment_A_Statement_of_Work.doc | DOC document |
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
140G0122Q0067 Repair Fishing Docks, Leetown
Amendment 0002, Questions and Responses:
1. Question: Since there is yet a defined scope of work, shall the proposed cost only include the inspection and report?
Response: The proposed cost is to include the inspection, report, and repairs.
2. Question: Is the March 15th site visit mandatory?
Response: Attendance at the site visit is not mandatory. The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.
3. Question: Are there photos and/or drawings available?
Response: No photos or drawings are available.
4. Question: Since this is Federal property are there any known permits required?
Response: No permits are required.
5. Question: Page 1 of the SOW, Paragraph 3.0 calls for inspection of the 3 docks and submission of a written report. Does this inspection need to be performed by a licensed structural engineer? If not an engineer, are there any qualifications required for the person performing the inspection?
Response: No mandatory qualifications but should be someone with knowledge of buildings and structures.
6. Question: Page 1 of the SOW, Paragraph 3.0 calls for any joists found to be defective to be replaced. It is not possible to inspect the joists until the decking boards are removed. Will the government view this as an unforeseen condition and consider a change for the defective joists upon discovery?
Response: After the joists are inspected a modification to the contract to add the cost of repairing the joists will be issued.
7. Question: Page 1 of the SOW, Paragraph 3.0 clearly calls out for the replacement of the deck boards. Please confirm that this does not include toe kick boards and the perimeter wood box material.
Response: I'm not sure what they are calling toe kick boards and the perimeter wood box material? If they are talking about the band board going around the dock (toe kick) than if no damage no repair needed. If they are talking about the wooden stands on the docks (wood box material) no replacement required.
8. Question: Do the supporting posts for the decks need to pass a structural integrity test from an engineer?
Response: See response to question 5.
9. Question: The scope of work says to replace what is damaged or rotten, who makes the determination of what is bad because that has an impact on the time of construction and cost of materials.
Response: USGS makes final determination.
10. Question: Page 8 of the Solicitation Document, F.5 Deliverables lists Payment Protection. Does this indicate that a Payment Bond is required from the Contractor? If so, are you requiring a Performance Bond also?
Response: Only a payment bond is required from the contractor for a project of this dollar value.
| 140G0122Q0067 |
| Attachment D Questions.Responses |
| Page 1 of 2 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .