A03_05 - CHOH 151201 Questions and Answers_0003.pdf
PDF 138 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 140P2020R0079
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to solicitation number 140P2020R0079 for the CHOH-151201 Reconstruct/Stabilize Historic Stone Wall & Towpath project from McMahons Mill to Lock 42. The solicitation involves reconstructing and stabilizing historic stone walls and a towpath along the Potomac River between the specified locations. The questions and answers provide additional details on tree sizes to be removed, permits that have been obtained by the government, the instream work waiver request submitted to the state, clarifications on backfill requirements below the waterline, and an extension of both the proposal question deadline and bid due date to August 6th and August 24th, 2020 respectively. Legible wage determination rates are also included as an update.
The document clarifies requirements and specifications to address contractor questions on the scope of work. Bidders should prepare their proposals assuming an instream waiver will be obtained, though changes would be addressed if the waiver is denied. Additional details in plan sheets and specifications have also been provided in the question responses.
View the file
Other files
Show all 45
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
Colum n6 ROUND #2 CHOH 151201 Question
Answer
In the plan sheet series C2.xx there are various plans sheets that identify trees for removal but do not identify the size of the tree. Please provide sizes of these trees..
Additional tree size data has been added as a redline to the "Revision 2" plans on the Sheet C2.XX series. These are provided along with this response. Of note is that the diameter of trees scheduled for demo and those anticipated to remain were both included in the redlined "Revision 2".
Section 01 31 00 1.9.B details the permits that the Government has procured and specifies that the contractor shall adhere to the terms and provisions of these permits. Please provide copies of these permits so the contact and bid responsibly.
Permit applications are ongoing with USACE & MDE. Any substantial changes in scope that result in conditions/constraints provided with the permit authorizations will be addressed per
52.243‐4 CHANGES.
Section 01 11 00 ‐ 1.7.C.2 states, "This section of the Potomac River is classified as a Use I Waters. MD‐DNR prohibits in‐ stream work within Use I Waters during the period March 1 through June 15, inclusive, during any year unless MD‐DNR issues a waiver. The NPS is currently filing a request for an instream waiver from MD‐DNR. NPS does not warrant or guarantee that a waiver will be granted."
This vague and will cause a large dissimilarity in costs among bidders if all do not use the same ideology, we suggest that this language be modified to the following:
DELETE: "NPS does not warrant or guarantee that a waiver will be granted.
ADD: "Bidders shall prepare their bid assuming that the MD‐ DNR will issues a waiver. If the MD‐DNR rejects the request, any additional costs will be addressed per 52.243‐4 CHANGES."
Concur, subject paragraph was edited to "a.To protect aqua c species, MDE prohibits in‐stream work during certain times of the year as determined by the classification of the stream. This section of the Potomac River is classified as a Use I Waters. MDE prohibits in‐stream work within Use I Waters during the period March 1 through June 15, inclusive, during any year unless MDE issues a waiver. The NPS has submitted an instream waiver and submitted to MD‐DNR and MDE. Coordination with these entities indicates that the waiver will very likely be granted. For bidding purposes, the contractor should assume that MDE will be issuing a waiver. If the waiver is not issued, then any impacts to the contract will be addressed under 52.243‐4 CHANGES." Revised section 011100 has been provided with this response.
For the Wall Extension at Station 21+69 ‐ 21+90: is it the government’s intention to place a portion the 57 stone below the water table?
As shown on Sheet S1.2, free draining stone is required to be placed under the water line within the 1H:1V line of influence projected up from the toe of the stone wall. However, due to constraints with placement of #57 stone below the water line, Detail 1 / Sheet S1.2 was revised to require that "IN REACHES
REQUIRED TO HAVE FREE DRAINING BACKFILL PLACED BENEATH
WATER, BACKFILL WITH WALL STONE MATERIAL (SALVAGED OR
NEW) BELOW THE WATER LINE. PACK VOIDS TIGHT WITH HEART
STONES IN SIMILAR MANNER TO WALL CONSTRUCTION." Redline revisions were added to sheet S1.2, and provided along with this response
For the Wall Extension at Station 12+55 ‐ 12+75 is it the government’s intention to place a portion the 57 stone below the water table?
As shown on Sheet S1.2, free draining stone is required to be placed under the water line within the 1H:1V line of influence projected up from the toe of the stone wall. However, due to constraints with placement of #57 stone below the water line, Detail 1 / Sheet S1.2 was revised to require that "IN REACHES
REQUIRED TO HAVE FREE DRAINING BACKFILL PLACED BENEATH
WATER, BACKFILL WITH WALL STONE MATERIAL (SALVAGED OR
NEW) BELOW THE WATER LINE. PACK VOIDS TIGHT WITH HEART
STONES IN SIMILAR MANNER TO WALL CONSTRUCTION." Redline revisions were added to sheet S1.2, and provided along with this response
Required offer documents lists SF 24 Bid Bond and is stated to be included as Attachment 8 (Bid Bond 08.2016 2). No attachment 8 has been included with the solicitation, can one be provided?
Attachment 8 Bid Bond has been included as referenced in Section J
Solicitation page 159 of 176 references an attached form 'Proposed Equals' to be submitted with the bid but no attachment was included with the bid documents. Is this document required, and if so can it be provided?
B08_Atch14 Equals has been added to Section J of the soliciation
Based on the forthcoming bid date extension referenced in your email from 7/23/20 from August 4 to August 13, we request a similar extension for the Proposal Question deadline to seven days prior to bid ‐ August 6. Please confirm.
The bid date has been extended to August 24, 2020, 1400MT (Amendment 02)
The wage rate determinations available with the bid documents for this project are unreadable. Can an updated copy of the required wages rates be provided?
Confirmed version(s) uploaded to BetaSAM as legible. Updated rates for Wage Determination MD20200022 Heavy and MD20200005 Construction: Heavy Dredging are available at https://beta.sam.gov/search?index=wd
Solicitation page 1, sections 8 & 13 specify an original and one copy are due electronically to the email address provided. Since this is an electronic‐only bid is the copy necessary or can section 13 be revised to state one signed electronic copy only?
Refer to SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO
OFFERORS.
The time offers are due is listed as 1600 (4:00PM) local time. Is this local time for the project site or local time for the office location offers are sent to (1600 MT‐4:00PM or 1800ET
6:00PM)?
52.215‐1(c)(3)(i) states Solicitation "If no time is specified in the solicitation the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., local time". Refer to
SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO
OFFERORS.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .