Attachment_1_Solicitation_Questions_and_Answers_Amendment_2.pdf

PDF 111 KB Posted

Attached to
NAMA 216036 185966 - Restoration of Jefferson Memorial Roof and Portico
Solicitation number
140P2018R0037
Issued by

About this file

Attachment 1_Solicitation Questions and Answers_Amendment 2

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Attachment_1_Solicitation_Questions_and_Answers_Amendment_03.pdf PDF
Attachment_2_NAMA_Park_Standard_Fence_Details.pdf PDF
140P2018R0037_Amendment_03_SF30.pdf PDF
Attachment_2_North_Portico_Steel_Beam_Replacement_As_Constructed_Drawings_2003.pdf PDF
140P2018R0037_Amendment_02_SF30.pdf PDF
Attachment_4_Historic_American_Buildings_Survey_Drawings_1994.pdf PDF
Attachment_3_Roofing_System_Replacement_Drawings_1994.pdf PDF
6_Laser_Cleaning_Test_Photos.pdf PDF
1_Preproposal_Conference_Slides_080218.ppt PPT presentation
7_Wage_Determination_DC180002_080318.pdf PDF
2_Preproposal_Conference_Sign_In_Sheets.pdf PDF
4_Record_of_Treatment_Report_111717.pdf PDF
140P2018R0037_Amendment_01_SF30.pdf PDF
5_Thomas_Jefferson_Memorial_CYARK_Field_Report.pdf PDF
3_Questions_and_Answers_Amenment_01.pdf PDF
B08_Attachment_3_-_Wage_Determination_DC180002_070618.pdf PDF
B08_Attachment_4_-_Justification_for_Brand_Name_-_PumpX53i_Rev_070218.pdf PDF
B08_Attachment_2_-_SPECIFICATIONS.pdf PDF
B08_Attachment_1_-_DRAWINGS.pdf PDF
B08_Attachment_5_-_Pre-Proposal_Site_Visit_Map.pdf PDF
B08_Attachment_6_-_Proposal_Submission_Package.pdf PDF
B08_Attachment_7_-_Bid_Bond_Form_SF24.pdf PDF
B08_Solicitation_140P2018R0037.pdf PDF
Show all 23

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

NAMA 216036 ‐ Restoration of Jefferson Memorial Roof and Portico

National Mall and Memorial Parks

Solicitation Questions and Answers

Note ‐ Questions 1‐7 were answered in Amendment 01, issued Tuesday, August 7, 2018. Questions 8‐

17 are newly issued in this Amendment.

Amendment 01:

1. Can I please request a two‐week extension to the proposal due date?

ANSWER: The Proposal Submission due date, for both electronic and hardcopies, is extended to

Monday, August 27, 2018 at 1200 MT (1400 ET). The Question period has been extended to

Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1200 MT (1400 ET).

2. Is the report available for the LASER cleaning mock‐up of the dome?

ANSWER: Yes, the draft Record of Treatment report for the Laser test cleaning of the Dome is attached (PDF) along with some photos of the access.

3. What other masonry cleaning methods were investigated?

ANSWER: This information is generally noted in the Record of Treatment report, but is irrelevant since the project scope of work and specifications call out what cleaning methodology is required for this project.

4. Are there reports available for other methods investigated?

ANSWER: No

5. What is the square‐footage of the masonry surface to be LASER‐cleaned?

ANSWER: This information is provided in the construction drawings and specifications, Sheet

A3.1, and Spec Section 04 01 40.52 – Stone Masonry Cleaning. The Offeror is required to conduct their own estimates of stone surfaces to be laser cleaned.

6. What is the square‐footage of the masonry surface to be cleaned using micro‐abrasion?

ANSWER: Refer to the response to question # 5 above.

7. Will the LASER mock‐up area need to be re‐cleaned?

ANSWER: Yes, the scope of work is to clean all stone surfaces.

Amendment 02:

8. Does the storm water line shown on M1.1 get insulation? If yes can a specification be given?

ANSWER: None of the new drain lines are to be insulated.

9. Please provide a Hazmat Report.

ANSWER: No hazardous materials survey was performed (or has been performed previously, to the design team’s knowledge) as it was not anticipated that it was needed based on conditions observed in the field. Should the Contractor find a condition that differs from what is identified in the drawings or specifications and might merit a hazardous materials survey, then they should notify the CO in writing immediately, per Clause 52.236‐2 “Differing Site Conditions” of the

Solicitation.

10. The response to the request for the surface area of marble to be laser cleaned stated that the information to calculate the surface area can be found in the specifications and drawing sheet

A3.1. However, there appears to be an error in the dimensions given in drawing sheet A3.1 as the drawing scale conflicts with the vertical dimensions provided in the drawing. There is at least one observed conflict:

The relative vertical dimensions given on A3.1 indicate that the top of the dome is less than 12’ from the top of the upper parapet, and only 36.395’ from the Relative 0.0 for this project. The scale, however, suggest that the top of the dome is actually more than 30’ from the top of the upper parapet and more than 55’ from the Relative 0.0.

Please review and verify the existing dimensions provided in the drawings. Please provide horizontal dimensions needed to calculate surface area, including but not limited to, radial dimensions from the center of the dome to the face of the architrave, upper parapet, and drum.

Also, to allow full and accurate calculation of surface area, it would be helpful if areas that include relief (including but not limited to dentils and sculpture at the pediment) are detailed and dimensioned (including depth of projections) in the drawings.

ANSWER: The elevation provided for the “Top of Dome” listed on AR3.1, AR3.2, AR4.1, AR4.2, and A3.1 should read 56.385’. The graphic scales on the same sheets are correct. Also note that the sum total square footage for all areas of cleaning/repointing is calculated and appears in the

General Elevation Notes on sheet A3.1.

It should be understood that neither the elevations nor all building elements were field verified as part of this project due to the defined scope and access issues. It is up to the Contractor to confirm and verify all dimensions and elevations in the field.

Also uploaded as part of this Amendment are the 1994 Historic American Buildings Survey

(HABS) drawings of the Memorial so that offerors can scale and measure any element. As instructed by the NPS, the design A/E used those drawings as the existing conditions drawings and to calculate the square footages for cleaning/repointing listing on sheet A3.1 in the General

Elevation Notes. Per this set, note that discrepancies are due to the fact the HABS drawings do not reflect all of the 2017 conditions on site. The HABS drawings may also be downloaded from the Library of Congress website at http://loc.gov/pictures/collection/hh/

11. Please confirm that there will be no testing of existing mortars to determine/confirm mix designs.

ANSWER: This is Correct. Offerors shall use mortar mix as called out in the specifications.

12. Has caulking been tested for ACM?

ANSWER: No. Any caulking material used during previous repair work since the 1970’s would not have any ACM, per Federal requirements.

13. Please provide detail/size for bonze weather bar. Contract docs indicate replacements may be necessary.

ANSWER: Bronze weather bar detail shown on 2/A8.5. Height of bar = 1‐1/4”; thickness of bar =

1/4”; length = unknown as the condition likely varies at each stone.

14. Please confirm we will have access via portico attic to attach anchors per detail 5/S2.0.

ANSWER: During construction, yes.

15. Please confirm stone marble tiles are not to be doweled into roof structure/penetrate waterproofing anywhere and are to be held in place by existing marble tub and mortar as shown on detail 2/AD8.3.

ANSWER: This is correct. However, the manner in which this question is stated, asking the government to confirm an installation approach that is not called for on the drawings, is not required, appears unnecessary.

16. Are the as built drawings for this project Thomas Jefferson Memorial available, if so can they be provided?

ANSWER: There is not one set of “As‐Built” drawings available for the Jefferson Memorial, in the context of what we would term “As‐Built” today, as this structure was designed and constructed in the 1930’s. There are some limited design drawings for various components, however, they are numerous and the government is not obligated to search and provide these to potential offerors in order for them to bid the work contained in the construction documents as part of this solicitation. That being stated, we have provided PDF copies of the 2003 North

Portico Structural Steel Beam Replacement As‐Constructed Drawings, and the 1994 Roofing

System Replacement Design Drawings (Flat Roofs). These documents are for background information only and are not officially part of the solicitation or construction documents package for this project. No further information will be provided to offerors.

17. Please schedule an additional site visit.

ANSWER: There will be no additional site visits scheduled during the solicitation period.

File details come from the government source that posted it.