PERL 264852 RFP Q and A ISSUED 5.18.2021_0002.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 26 KB Posted
- Attached to
- PERL 264852 Pearl Harbor National Monument Repla
- Solicitation number
- 140P2021R0016
About this file
This document file contains a question and answer spreadsheet and related documents for a federal solicitation to replace an existing floating dock and shoreside mooring system at Pearl Harbor National Monument in Hawaii. The solicitation seeks to replace two aging floating concrete dock sections with new post-tensioned prefabricated sections, along with installing a new shoreside structural mooring system, gangways, and related components. The work includes removing existing guide piles and stabilizing the dock during construction. A new davit and dive ladder will be added. The solicitation is identified as number 140P2021R0016 and is issued by the National Park Service National Office within the Department of the Interior. Questions from potential offerors are answered providing clarification on contract requirements, schedules, submittals, and past performance evaluation.
View the file
Other files
Show all 19
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
Sheet1 updated 2021-05-18 Question and Answer Spreadsheet
140P2021R0016 PERL 264852
| Question No. | Question | Response | |
| 1 | SF1442 / 01 11 00 1.3.A – Per the SF1442 and advertisement, it is noted that 428 calendar days are being allowed for contract time from NTP. However, 01 11 00 1.3.A notes that Phase 1 shall be substantially complete within 200 calendar days from NTP and Phase 2 within 300 calendar days. In discussions with suppliers, the 200 calendar days from NTP for Phase 1 substantial completion is unlikely due to lead times and mobilization. Please revise 01 11 00 1.3.A to remove the 200/ 300 calendar day requirements to allow for adequate time to procure and mobilize the project. | The contract time stated in the SF 1442 and advertisement is incorrect. The contract time for each phase shall be per specification 01 11 00 1.3 A, except that the contract time from project NTP to Substantial Completion for Phase 1 is hereby changed from 200 calendar days to 240 270 calendar days. The contract time for Phase 2 remains 300 calendar days from project NTP to Substantial Completion. Contract Liquidated Damages will apply for each day that either Phase is not Substantially Complete as specified above. | Answered in Amendment No. 1, and subsequently revised in Bid Amendment #2. |
| 2 | Please provide the geotechnical soils report identified in the contract documents. | The final geotechnical report is included with Bid Amendment #1. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 |
| 3 | 01 11 00 1.8 Work Restrictions - Under 1.8.C, it is noted special hours apply for "core drilling". Please advise what activities this applies to. | According to the AE design team, the core drilling restriction no longer applies to this project. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 |
| 4 | 01 11 00 1.8 Work Restrictions – Under 1.8.C, it is noted working hours are to be 7 am to 5 pm Monday – Friday. To minimize interference with pedestrian traffic, please advise if it is permissible to look at an after 5 pm work schedule for certain activities including anchor pile drilling, concrete deliveries/ placement, etc. | Normal work hours are 7am to 5pm Monday through Friday, excluding Federal Holidays. It is common for contractors to request permission (well in advance) to work on Federal Holidays, or outside the normal time limits - especially during key periods of construction. These requests are often granted as long as visitor and staff safety is maintained, and as long as park operations and other relevant potential impacts are adequately addressed. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 |
| 5 | Mooring struts/ anchor pile – Please confirm the mooring struts and anchors piles are fully designed per the contract documents. | According to the AE design team the mooring struts and anchor piles are fully designed. Contractor shop drawings shall be provided by the contractor per the specifications. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 |
| 6 | Anchor pile construction joint – No construction joint is included for the construction of the anchor pile. It is advised to provide better quality control for the placement mooring strut bracket, a construction joint be allowed at Elev. +3’ MSL. Please advise if this is acceptable. | According to the AE design team, a construction joint is acceptable. Contractor to provide drawing of proposed alternative placement of reinforcing steel to allow for joint. Contractor to provide detail and material to seal joint. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 |
| 7 | Existing concrete mooring pile – Please advise if it acceptable to cut off the existing concrete pile at/ near mudline. | Full extraction of existing concrete piles is required to accommodate future maintenance dredging operations. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 |
| 8 | As-builts – please provide as-builts of the existing facility including floating docks, pile, etc. | The AE's understanding is that piles left over from 2008 building foundation work were used to secure the existing dock in place, and the length of piles are expected to be between 70' and 90' depending on which piles were used. Dock as-built drawings may be provided in a subsequent Bid Amendment. As-built dock drawings are included in Bid Amendment #2. | Answered in Amendment No. 1, and subsequently amended in Bid Amendment #2. |
| 9 | Sheet C5/C6 Mooring Lines – Mooring lines are shown on Sheet C5/C6 to both the new and existing floating dock, but no other details are provided. Please clarify the intention for these mooring lines and provide details are appropriate. | Mooring lines are shown only for temporarily securing existing docks. The existing anchor blocks and anchor chains are not thought to be competent for use during the required temporary stabilization of the east half of the dock. | ||
| New docks shall rely on the new strut mooring system to maintain position. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |||
| 10 | Section 03 31 29 Marine Concrete – 2.1.B.6 indicates a chloride ion penetration test shall be performed. Please confirm whether this applies to only the floating shoreside dock concrete or the anchor pile concrete as well? From our experience, this is typically not required in an application like the anchor piles. | According to the AE design team, Chloride Ion Penetration Tests shall be performed for all marine concrete as defined in the specifications, especially for CIP concrete above any construction joint proposed by a contractor for 3 feet below top of anchor pile. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 11 | Section L Technical Proposal Past Performance – Please confirm the newer CPARS are acceptable in lieu of the PPIRS evaluation reports. | The newer CPARS are acceptable. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 12 | Section L Technical Proposal Past Performance – Please confirm CPARS/ PPIRS reports can be submitted directly by the contractor. | CPARS/PPIRS reports may be submitted directly by the contractor. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 13 | Please provide information you may have regarding high tide levels. | See the attached pdf photo of one of the recent highest tides experienced at the dock. The photo was taken around 6:00 a.m. on 10/20/20. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 14 | Section B Price Schedule requests “Also provide a separate Schedule of Values (SOV) for each line item in the Section B Contract Price Schedule. Each SOV shall show the line-item price broken down by major work components.” Please provide a list of (SOV) tasks for bidding purposes to insure all bidders follow the same (SOV). This will also benefit the Government review process as well. | A separate Schedule of Values is not required for proposals. |
| The contractor that is awarded the contract will be required to submit a detailed Schedule of Values as one of the Division1 specification submittals, after contract award. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |||
| 15 | Please provide bid quantities for concrete crack and spall repairs. | Quantities will not be provided. The scope of repairs shall be estimated from the Contract Documents. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 16 | The Government is allowing Past Performance of subcontractors in Factor 7: Past Performance. The RFP states: “Information may be regarding the offeror's firm and/or its proposed subcontractors performing key trades and other construction activities. Subcontractor past performance will only be considered if it correlates to the work the subcontractor will be performing on this requirement.” Can the Government confirm that subcontractor experience may also be used for Factor 2: Project Experience. | Subcontractor experience may also be used. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 17 | Does the Government want a Table of Contents included in Volume I? | A table of contents will be helpful. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 18 | Can the government confirm that there are no font or margin restrictions for both Volumes? | Standard/common font and margins are recommended for facilitating review of proposals. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 19 | Can the Government confirm that Factor 6: Project Schedule may be submitted on 11x17inch pages? | 11X17 inch page size is preferred for facilitating review of proposal schedules. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 20 | We did not find minimum qualifications for key personnel resumes in Factor 3: Key Personnel Experience. Please provide minimum qualifications for each position. | Relevant/applicable qualifications for each of the Key Personnel roles are expected. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 21 | Is there a page limit to Factor 2: Project Experience? | Limit each project to two pages. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 22 | Will the Government accept a cover letter provided in each volume and exclude from the page count? | Yes. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 23 | Will the Government accept previously completed PPQs in lieu of the PPQ form provided with this Solicitation? | Yes, as long as the PPQ is relatively recent. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 24 | Will the Government accept a CPAR in lieu of a PPQ? | No. PPQs are helpful and useful. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 25 | Will the Government commit to extending the due date to weeks after all RFIs have been answered to allow Offerors adequate time to incorporate changes into their proposals? | The questions cutoff date has been extended to May 21, 2021. The intent is for the Government to promptly respond to any questions received by that date, so that offerors may incorporate those answers in proposals due on June 3, 2021. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 26 | Are Offerors allowed to edit headers and footers in the margins on forms provided by the Government (ex. Adding logo, solicitation number, Volume and factor on Project Experience form)? | No. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 27 | For Factor 5: Safety, the RFP states “Include the names, resumes, and specific safety training completed (i.e., OSHA, etc.) for the proposed Project Site Safety Manager for this project.” |
Is the Proposed Site Safety Manager the same position as the Safety Manager in Factor 3?
Is the Government requiring more than one resume for this position?
| Please provide minimum qualifications for the position. | This is the same position. One resume is sufficient. Provide relevant/applicable qualifications. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | ||
| 28 | The provided PPQ form does not provide a NPS point of contact for transmittal in Section E. Please clarify. | Transmit to Greg Passig and Gabriel Castellanos. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 29 | Please provide details of the white boat access ramps to be provided under the option CLIN. | See the attached Throw Ramp Information PDF file, excerpted from AE documents. Other features of the throw ramps shall generally conform to the existing throw ramps currently in use. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 30 | Some discussions were had during the site visit indicating that certain items of vegetation and trees may not need to be restored. However, Section 01 11 00 requires vegetation and trees be restored and/ or replaced to their original state. Please confirm landscaping shall be restored excluding the tree to be removed (Sheet C4). | Park staff has confirmed that removal of brushy vegetation (within reasonable limits) to construct Anchor Pile #1 and Anchor Pile #2 will be permitted, and that restoration of this vegetation is not required of the construction contractor. If a tree other than the one identified by Note 5 on sheet C4 must be removed for access to Anchor Pile #2, it shall be replaced in-kind by the construction contractor. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 31 | Please provide as-builts of the covered walkway on the east approach. | As-built drawings of the covered walkway area are provided with Bid Amendment #2. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 32 | 4. Section 03 31 29 2.1.B.4 – Please remove the air requirements for the mooring anchor piles. This is not typical for drilled shaft concrete mixes. | The AE design team agrees that air requirements for the anchor pile concrete is not necessary. Air entrainment for the mooring anchor pile concrete is hereby deleted. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 33 | Section 03 31 29 2.2.G – Please confirm drilled shaft reinforcing steel is required to have epoxy coating | According to the AE design team, epoxy coating is required for the drilled shaft reinforcing steel. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 34 | Is there a Division 1 submittals list? | Division 1 submittals are identified in specification 01 31 11 1.3 A. Submittal 10 shall include a spill prevention and response plan as called for in General Note 5.2.1 on plan sheet G1. Also, submit with the Division 1 submittals a Laydown and Staging Plan as required by General Note 1.8 on plan sheet G1. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 35 | Is there a technical submittals list? | See the attached Technical Submittals list. | Answered in Amendment No. 1 | |
| 36 | Section 11 of the Solicitation states the contractor will have 438 days to complete the work. Spec 01 11 00, Page 2, 1.3.A.2 states that Phase 2 “shall be” completed within 300 days of NTP. Please clarify the allowable project duration. | Refer to Q&A #1. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 37 | Drawing Sheet 2, General Note 1.10. Reference is made to NPS DRAWING SET #017-80,910 FOR REPLACEMENT OF SHORESIDE DOCK, JUNE 1998. Please provide. | Refer to Q&A #8. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 38 | Drawing Sheets 11 & 12; Spec 01 27 00, Page 1, 3.1.B.1; Spec 01 32 16, Page 2.2.B.7.f; Spec 03 31 29, Page 1, 1.1 & Page 8, 2.1.A.b. Mention is made of “anchor blocks” but no details specific to them are provided. Is it correct to assume that the anchor blocks are the concrete corbels on the tops of the anchor piles that form the mounting foundation for the mooring strut brackets? | The dock will be anchored to the six new anchor piles with concrete corbels on top. There are no new anchor blocks to be installed elsewhere. Existing concrete anchor blocks on the Halawa Stream streambed are to remain undisturbed. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 39 | Please provide drawing plans, details and specifications for the White Boat Ramps to be provided in CLIN 4, Option A. | Refer to Q&A #29. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 40 | Drawing Sheet 11, Keynote 14 indicates a Davit is to be installed on the West Dock, but none is shown. Spec 01 77 00, Page 2, 1.4.A also calls out a davit on the West Dock installed for final inspection. However, Drawing Sheet 12, Keynote 14 indicates a Davit is to be installed on the East Dock, and it is called out, and it is also shown on Drawing Sheet 16. Please clarify. | The Davit is to be installed at the east end of the east dock, per the drawings. A Davit is not required on the west dock. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 41 | Spec 35 59 94, Page 4, 1.4.L calls for a continuous UHMW wear block on the sliding edge of the transition plate on the floating dock end of the gangway. However, this feature is not indicated on Drawing Sheet 18, which shows a SS skid plate. Alternately, Drawing Sheet 20 has a different detail for the transitions plate(s) that applies to both the landside and dockside ends of the gangway and includes the UHMW feature. |
a. Please clarify if a UHMW wear block is required. If so, please clarify and/or confirm details such as locations and dimensions.
b. Drawing Sheet 18 shows a SS skid plate on the deck of the floating dock.
i. No mounting details are provided. Please provide, if this feature is required. Would it be permanent or removable?
| ii. Would this plate be in addition to, or in place of, a UHMW wear block? Or is it not required if a wear block is used? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |||
| 42 | Spec 01 11 00, 1.8 Soils Investigation report states that a copy of the soils investigation report is available to all plan holders. Please provide a copy of the report entitled “Geotechnical Investigation Replace Shoreside Floating Dock & Anchoring System Pearl Harbor National Memorial Honolulu, Hawaii (Contract No. 140P8219D0001), dated July 13, 2020, has been prepared by Hirata & Associates, Inc. | Refer to Q&A #2. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 43 | The boring logs show soft clayey silt material for the full length of the drill cast in place anchor piles. This type of material will require casing. Given the very restrictive space available to perform the drilled shaft operations, can the contractor use permanent steel casing for the drilled cast in place anchor piles to prevent the drilled holes from collapsing? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | ||
| 44 | Due to the critical need to ensure that the anchor bolts in all anchor piles/anchor blocks are at the same elevation, normal to each other, and at the required dimensions, and due to the density of the pile reinforcing around the anchor bolts, is it permissible to cast the top of the pile separate from the section of the pile that will be below ground level? This will also permit placing of tremie concrete separately from that placed around the anchor bolts, ensuring that sound concrete is cast throughout the full height of the anchor pile and anchor block. | Refer to Q&A #6. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 45 | For the Past Performance Questionnaire, is it acceptable to provide a previously completed NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-O) document or CPARS or CCASS Final Evaluation in lieu of the Past Performance Questionnaire form provided in the RFP documents. NAVFAC Hawaii contract personnel have advised that they will no longer complete PPQ forms. | A previously completed PPQ document is acceptable. Also refer to Q&As 11,12, 23, 24, and 28. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 46 | respectfully request a bid extension for a minimum of 2 weeks to properly prepare for the proposal submission. | Refer to Q&A #25. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 47 | Please clarify extent of required landscaping restoration. |
a. It was mentioned at the site visit that replacement of the vegetation on the west side of the ramp was not required, please confirm.
| b. Will landscaping restoration be required by the Contractor for any other areas of the park (i.e., haul route, laydown area)? | Refer to Q&A #30. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | ||
| 48 | Please provide as-builts of the existing walkways within the park that will be traversed during the course of the project. | Refer to Q&A #31. Also, walkways are open for observation and measurement, and can be observed via Google Earth. | ||
| 49 | Contract time – Per Question No. 1, it is noted that the new completion dates are 240 calendar days – Phase I and 300 calendar days – Phase 2. After discussions with the fabricator, the 240 calendar days for completion of Phase 1 is aggressive providing the variability in design, design review, fabrication and freight schedule. Please consider eliminating the 240 calendar day Phase 1 milestone and only require phased construction with an overall completion of 300 calendar days. This would allow for more flexibility while still maintaining the overall completion schedule. | Refer to Q&A #1, as revised by Bid Amendment #2. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 50 | Existing concrete pile – Per Question No. 7, it is noted full extraction of the existing concrete pile is required. Please confirm the use of jetting, pile extractors, and other means as required as permissible to extract these pile. | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | ||
| 51 | CPARS – It appears the response to Question No. 24 is in conflict of responses to Question No. 11/12. Please confirm that if a CPARS is provided, a PPQ is not required. | New CPARs reports will be accepted. PPQs are helpful and useful. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 52 | In review of the Project Experience form for Factor 2, Question 2 suggests to identify the portions of the work which address the elements listed in Section L. Please advise if the reference to Section L refers to the Aspect listed under Factor 2 – Project Experience or if it is in reference to all Aspects in general | That is correct; it does refer to the aspect listed under the project experience factor and does not need to touch all aspects in general. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 53 | Regarding replacement gangways: The contract drawings (Sheet 6) appears to show a 30’ overall length with (1)x 24” and (1)x 42” extension. Can you confirm the 30’ is the overall length required, or is it 30’ + extensions for a total overall length of 35’6”? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | ||
| 54 | Regarding replacement gangways: Is the stacked tubular truss design shown in Detail “A” required, or are we free to design the truss system differently? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | ||
| 55 | Regarding replacement gangways: The specification mentions the design loading to include any attached utilities, I did not see any utilities called out but want to confirm if any utilities are going to be used? | The new gangways are not intended to contain any utilities. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 | |
| 56 | Regarding replacement gangways: The specification calls out the dock motion, we see the vertical dock motion shown on the drawing, but I do not see a reference to the horizontal drift. Can you please provide how much horizontal drift we need to account for in our hinge design? |
Longshore, Jason James: Longshore, Jason James:
| Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |||
| 57 | The Floating Dock-Side Brackets 1/S1 and Mooring Struct Brackets 3&4/S10 will not slip together as gusseted nor is there a Pin connection detail at these joint configurations. Please advise if the Dock-Side Brackets 1/S1 should be designed similar to the Abutment Bracket A/S9? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |
| 58 | The 4” SS Pin at 1/S9 does not indicate the thread/Nut size. Please provide thread/nut size of the SS pin. Is 2 ¾”NC Thread size acceptable? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |
| 59 | The conjoined HSS 16 & 14” Mooring Strut Bracket weldment at 3/S10 cannot be fabricated as detailed welded at 90deg. to the base plate because of the diameter difference. Either a plate would have to be inserted between the HSS or we could continue the 16” HSS fully mitered to the base plate and cope the 14” HSS into the 16” HSS. Please clarify. | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |
| 60 | Metal Fabrications 05 50 00-5 Specification 2.4 Finish suggest all ferrous metal and fasteners shall be hot-dip galvanized. 2.4.B Notes the Mooring Struts shall be HDG than painted per Paint and Coating 09 90 00. Please clarify if it is just the 14”, 16” & 10” Mooring Struts and Crossbeams are to be coated after galv. and the Dock-Side, Abutment-Side and Strut-Side Brackets remain HDG? Please verify if painting is still needed on HDG metal. | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |
| 61 | Please provide existing floating module details and other construction information. Is there foam? Any hazardous materials? | As-built dock drawings are included in Bid Amendment #2. The existing dock modules are not filled with foam. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 |
| 62 | Are there any areas of coral or seagrass in the harbor that will impact our ability to deploy anchors? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |
| 63 | Please provide road and/or bridge (Admiral Clarey ridge) load restriction, if any. | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |
| 64 | Per specification section 31 23 16, paragraph 3.2.B, It states “ . . . . . Special Inspection, periodic or continuous, of SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS shall be provided as required by ICC-ES evaluation reports and/or as specified by the Contracting Officer. . .” |
a. Please clarify what is the ICC-ES evaluation report?
| b. Please specify what tests (if any) are needed for the drilled shafts. | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | |||
| 65 | Spec section 35 59 94 ALUMINUM GANGWAYS references “Section 02 23 00 Selective Demolition” under related work, but there is no such spec section provided. Please confirm that the correct reference is to the Selective Demolition spec that is provided – 02 41 13. If not, please provide the correct spec section reference. | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | ||
| 66 | Alpha Landing and Kilo 10-11 Pier have be indicated as potential temporary mooring sites for either the new or old floating docks. Please provide additional information in order to evaluate the suitability of their use. Such information may include time of year restrictions and/or duration of use restrictions. Are week-long or even month-long mooring durations permitted? | Answer pending as of Bid Amendment #2. | ||
| 67 | Drawing Sheet 10, C4, Demolition Plan, designates the “APPROX. LIMITS OF WORK”. As shown, there is not nearly enough room to perform the anchor pile work with land-base equipment. Is it the government’s intent to require that this work be performed from marine based equipment? | The intent is to perform the anchor pile work with land-based equipment. Requests for reasonable limits of work will be considered. Restoration of all disturbed areas is required at no additional cost to the Government. | Answered in Amendment No. 2 |
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .