B09_CHOH_245002_287711_Amd_7_-_QA_0007.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 52 KB Posted
- Attached to
- CHOH 245002 287711 -Locks and Wall
- Solicitation number
- 140P2022R0130
About this file
This document is a solicitation for the CHOH 245002 287711 - Locks and Wall project. The solicitation seeks construction services for repairs and improvements to locks, walls, and other structures along the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal in Washington, D.C. and Maryland. Services include stone masonry reconstruction, timber repairs and replacements, concrete repairs and replacements, and other structural work. The National Park Service is the contracting agency. The response due date for proposals was April 20, 2023. Pricing is to be provided through fixed-price contract line items for various tasks. There are also options that can be awarded separately or together. The period of performance end date listed for evaluation purposes is October 30, 2025.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 85 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
| Question Set | Set Number | Question | Response |
| A |
Amendment 0003
| Posted: 03/01/2023 | 1 | Definition of Contract Lines does not seem to line up with Bid Schedule We see no reference to Contract Line Items L1, L2, etc. on Bid Schedule. | Revised Sec. 012700 to match with Bid Schedule. A revised bid schedule correcting street number to be issued in next amendment | |
| 2 | Please confirm that salvaged stone is going to be reset in a similar pattern as existing stone and not piece by piece at exact same location as original. | Please clarify which wall/area this comment applies. | ||
| 3 | Spec Section 040342, Paragraph 2.4.B calls for mortar to be Portland Cement, Type 1 White. Spec Section 041000, Paragraph 2.1.B.1 calls for Natural Cement which is substantially more expensive. Please confirm which type of cement we are to use. | The mortar specified in 040342 should be used for architectural work. For example, detail 6/A8.1, the note "Cover break surfaces with color matched mortar." |
Specification Section 041000 shall be revised to show which work areas will be repaired using natural vs. portland cement for structural features. Additional details regarding the use of Portland Cement based mortar will also be included in the revised specification. Revised specification to be released in a furture amendment.
| 4 | Can Obelisk as shown on A4.0 be stored on site or are there any special requirements because of its historic nature. | The contractor should store the obelisk on site. Contractor shall provide before and after photos to capture its condition. Extreme care to be taken during its removal, storage, and installation. |
| 5 | Is there any restoration to ball finial other than resetting? | Restoring the ball finial other than resetting is currently not in the SOW. |
| 6 | Please confirm frequency of mortar testing is 1 test per week per Note K on S0.01 and not daily. | Specification 041000 3.2A "provide compresion strength tests for every day's work." Will issue drawing addendum to clarify |
| 7 | Please confirm that equipment can travel on top of existing timber planking at locks and/or does flooring need to be protected. | Do not damage existing foundation planking and timbers that are to remain. Provide means of protection as necessary. |
| 8 | Please refer to drawing 1/S2.1 and multiple other locations. There is note about chinking walls. However, there is no pay item for chinking on Bid Schedule. Please advise. | Work for Level 1 North wall in detail 1/S2.1 is included in CLIN 0026 which is a lump sum price. In other locations, where chinking is requried, costs should be included in lump sum price as well. |
| 9 | Please confirm that pattern for new wall is to match existing wall photos as shown on S5.7. | Refer to 1/S5.8 for requirements to match the character of the size, shape, and coursing of existing stones prior to bracing. |
| 10 | Will there be any repointing required at Grace Street wall that is to remain? | The existing wall is to be grouted prior to the bracing removal per sequence on S5.5 therefore repointing is not required. Existing pockets in wall are to be filled with mortared stone prior to concrete placement per 1/S5.6. |
| 11 | Bid Schedule refers to 3206 Grace Street Wall. Drawings refer to 3207 Grace Street Wall. Please confirm this is the same wall. | Confirmed they are the same wall. A revised bid schedule correcting street number to be issued in next amendment |
| 12 | What Contract Line Item are we to bid the bricking up existing culverts. This is typical throughout. | Bricking and infilling of culverts to be covered in the lump sum contract line item per site. For example bricking and infilling culverts to be covered in CLIN 0010 for Lift Lock 1 and CLIN 0015 for Lift Lock 2. Lock 5 bricking of culverts is covered in CLIN 0023 as described in the definition of contract line items. See revised bid schedule attached to this Amendment. |
| 13 | Will NPS control water levels during construction in the canal? | During construction, water levels in the canal will be lowered where possible using existing canal infrastructure (existing canal outlets/wasteweirs will be opened and canal inlet lock closed). The contractor will be responsible for localized dewatering and addressing residual flows from adjacent tributaries that empty into the canal including but not limited to stormwater runoff. Any pumping capacity shown on the plans is for permitting purposes only, the contractor is solely responsible for managing water inside and adjacent to the work areas. Of note is that work at the guard lock is subjected to the Potomac River flows - the nearest river gauge is here https://waterdata.usgs.gov/monitoring-location/01646500/. |
| 14 | We were unaware of the pre-proposal site visit on Feb 6th. Can you please provide minutes of the meeting as well as a list of both Gov’t and Contractors / Engineers that attended? | A copy of the sign-in sheet of contractors that attended the pre-proposal site visit on Feb 6th, has been included with Amendment 002. There were no notes taken. |
| 15 | We noted the example projects needed to have been completed within the past 6 years. There are few projects that meet all the specified criteria awarded in any one year. We request the time frame for allowable projects be increased to 15 years? | Time frame for example projects completed with in the last 10 years can be considered. |
| 16 | May the Project Manager also serve as the On-Site Quality Control Manager? | Project Manager may also serve as the On-site QC Manager |
| 17 | Page 58 of 65 of the RFP Factor 7 states “A minimum of 30% of the total contract value must be performed by small businesses.” Page 60 of the RFP under 3. Vii SMALL BUSINESS CONTRACTING PLAN states “The NPS subcontracting goals for Fiscal Year 2022 are: Small Businesses (44%), Small Disadvantaged Businesses (5%), Women-Owned Businesses (5%), HUBZone (3%), and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Businesses (3%).” Please confirm the total Small Business requirement for this project is 30%. | Page 58 of the RFP Factor 7 is specifically for Small Businesses Firms, while Page 60 of the RFP under 3. vii SMALL BUSINESS CONTRACTING PLAN is specifically for Large Businesses to submit their Small Business Sub-Contracting Plan. The Small Business Sub-Contracting Plan is NOT required to be submitted by Small Business Firms. |
| 18 | RFP States "Submit your schedule; for evaluation purposes only assume a Notice to Proceed date of 11/01/2022 with a POP end date of 10/31/2024 and include specific activities required for this project and a clear critical path with major milestones and applicable predecessor activities." Please provide updated NTP and completion dates. | The new dates for submission are: Assume a Notice to Proceed date of 11/01/2023 with a POP end date of 10/30/2025. These dates are used for schedule evaluation purposes only, upon issuance of award and submission of actual schedule, the submitted actual schedule will be approved/disapproved based on referencing the submitted schedule for this solicitation. |
| 19 | May we use 11x17 pages for the Schedule document? | As all proposals are to be submitted electronically, schedules may be submitted in 11x17 page formatting. |
| 20 | Will a proposal cover and cover letter count against any page limits? | Proposal Covers and cover letters do not add to the required page count. |
| 21 | On a recent solicitation for very similar scope (Locks 5 thru 22), the below was requested as part of the EXPERIENCE Factor. Since the stone mason subcontractor is so important for the proper performance of the overall project, will you consider including the below, and placing a page limit on the overall Experience Factor as was included in that solicitation (9 pages for the prime and 9 pages for the Masonry subcontractor). |
“TAB A – SUBFACTOR 1.2 – MASONRY SUBCONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT
The proposed subcontractor or offeror shall complete and provide the experience form for up to three (3) substantially completed projects performed by the subcontractor responsible for the masonry work required by this project with in the last (5) five years which are proposed to be similar scope, magnitude of effort, and complexities. You may also provide additional experience documentation as long as the page limits are not exceeded.
• Projects considered substantially complete are projects that have been completed enough to determine performance on all phases of the project.
• Projects considered similar include historic masonry construction including placement of large, natural historic stone work and matching the appearance of historic stone with newly quarried stone, replacement of lock gates and waste weirs, towpath repairs, bridge construction and liner
| installation.” | This requested change to the evaluation criteria will not be included in the solicitation. |
| ****Please note we will not take questions after March 23,2023*** Bids due 12:00 ET 4/20*** | |
| B |
Amendment 0004
| Posted: 03/20/2023 | 22 | Specification section 01 33 23 1.3D does not indicate a timeframe to review action or informational submittals. Please establish an initial review timeframe of 30 calendar days and 20 calendar days for each re-submittal of action submittals. Please establish an initial review timeframe of 10 calendar days for initial review and 10 days for subsequent re-submittal of informational submittals. | A revised Sec. 013323 Submittal Procedures, specifying length of time for submittal reviews has been prepared and will be issued with the amendment. | |
| 23 | Please confirm there is no requirement for providing a field office for the Contracting Officer per specification 01 50 00 2.2 B | Confirmed, Government's representatives (CO, CMR, etc.) office will be located in NPS's Georgetown Visitor Center per Section 015000 of the Specifications. Contractor is responsible for establishing their own offices elsewhere. | ||
| 24 | If the Contracting Officer's field office is located at the Georgetown Visitors Center, is there a need to provide office materials noted in specification section 01 50 00 2.3 Equipment. | Contractor will not be responsible for Government Representative (CO, CMR, etc.) office materials. Revised Sec. 015000 has been prepared and will be issued with the amendment. | ||
| 25 | Is the contractor required to provide and pay for utility usage at the Georgetown Visitors Center during construction? | Utility usage for Government'r representatives (CO, CMR, etc.) at the Georgetown Visitor Center will not be paid by the contractor. Utility usage by the contractor shall follow specification Sec. 015000 3.2. | ||
| 26 | Specification section 01 50 00 3.5 mentions clean and renovate permanent facilities used during construction period once Substantial Complete has been reached. Is the contractor required to do any renovation work at the Georgetown Visitors Center once the project is completed? If so, what is required for this scope of work? | Contractor will not be responsible for cleaning and renovating spaces used by Government Representative (CO, CMR, etc.). Contractor will be responsibile for cleaning and repair of damage caused by Work for each temporary facility the contractor has installed or connected to upon end of service and no later than Substantial Completion. | ||
| 27 | The provided geotechnical report indicates elevated levels of Benzo[a]pyrene in the soil sample taken at Locks 1 & 2. Are additional soil samples and testing required by the contractor to take at the other project locations to determine if the soils are considered contaminated? Would you please consider adding a contingent bid item for handling and disposal of contaminated soils? | MOVED to Question 113 | ||
| 28 | Are there any historical stream flow information available for the canal in the proposed work areas? | MOVED to Question 114 | ||
| 27 | Plan sheet S5.2 shows adding soil nails the portion of compromised wall to the east side of the pedestrian bridge and removing all temporary shoring in phases. Please confirm no soil nails or shotcrete will be required in the area underneath the pedestrian bridge. | Confirmed. | ||
| 28 | Details for the Inlet Lock bridge shown on S9.4 indicate all angle diaphragms are to be field welded to the W21 Beam stiffener plates. Is it acceptable to replace the welded connection with a bolted connection? If so, can you please provide a bolted connection detail? | A bolted vs welded connection may be submitted by the contractor provides signed and sealed calculations and shop drawings for COR review and approval of the proposed changes after contract award. | ||
| 29 | Total Proposed Price for Bid Schedule 2 asks for the sum of CLIN's 01-12. The CLIN's for Bid Schedule 2 are 30-41. Please confirm we're to include the price of CLIN's 30-41 in the total proposed price for Bid Schedule 2. | Will add section for Schedule Two pricing as well as Total Contract pricing | ||
| 30 | Is the intent of to award both Bid Schedule 1 and Bid Schedule 2 to one contractor? | Yes, both schedules will be combined into one project awarded to one contractor | ||
| 31 | Please include a mobilization line item for both Bid Schedule 1 and Bid Schedule 2. | A mobilization line will not be included | ||
| 32 | The current Small Business Goal is stated to be 30% of the total contract value. This project requires significant specialized construction means and methods that would lean on the contractor to self-perform, which makes it rather difficult to achieve the stated goal. Please consider lowering the Small Business goals for this solicitation. | The small business goals will not be lowered | ||
| 35 | Plan sheet S3.3 detail 1 indicates the contractor is required to maintain a minimum of 6" of water in the lock unless active work is occurring in this area. The contractor is only allowed to dewater the area for no longer than 8hrs per shift of work. Dewatering Lock 2 each shift and placing water back into the Lock significantly limits the amount of work that can be completed in each shift, let alone allow enough time for the concrete infill sections to cure properly prior to placing water back into the Lock. Please consider allowing the contractor to keep the Lock dewatered during the work week, then refill lock to a minimum iof 6" above timbers during the weekend. | Drawing requirements will remain unchanged. It is expected that this will be reflected in the bids. It is acceptable to cure concrete in water. |
JR: The bidders question as to how this impacts curing of the concrete infill is valid, how would that be possible to do without keeping water out of the locks during curing? IS It reasonable to say that while concrete is curing the lock could be left dry? Is an alternate to place moist soils over the timber foundation in lieu of currently requied 6" of water? Are any of the measures in current literature able to be applied in lieu of current watering requirements (for ex. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/12/9/1193) ? How do we know the proposed duration of 8 hours is supported by scientific studies ?
| 33 | During the site visit, we noticed a significant amount of tree debris that was collected in the Feeder Channel at the Guard Lock. In the scope of work we're required to clear all debris from the Feeder Channel. In the event of a rain storm after the channel is cleaned, there is a high probability that additional debris will accumulate in the Feeder Channel. Will National Parks accept the Feeder Channel once the initial cleaning has been completed? If additional maintenance of the Feeder Channel is required once the initial cleaning has been completed, how is the contractor to be compensated for this additional work? | The completion/acceptance of clearing debris from the Feeder Channel will be accepted at the time of inspection and acceptance each Lock / Work-site in its entirety. |
| 34 | Once initial sediment has been cleaned and removed from the Lift Locks there's potential for additional sediment to accumulate during rainfall events. Will the contractor be compensated for any additional sediment removal after the initial cleaning has been completed? | It is the responsibility of the Contractor to continually maintain sediment accumulation until the work at each Lock / Work Site has been inspected and accepted by the Government in its entirety. |
| 35 | SF 1442 states the proposal is due at 1200 (hour) local time. Please indicate if local time is Eastern Time or Mountain Time. | The response time is 1200 Eastern Time |
| 36 | Provide follow Revised Spec Section 041000 from Comment 3 above. | A Revised Sec. 041000 has been prepared and has been issued with the amendment. |
Summary of changes included a list of which mortar is to be used at each site, added the Portland Cement ASTM C270 type N mortar, and revised the requirements for submitting samples and mortar cube tests for each site.
| 37 | Please confirm the contractor is allowed to close the Rock Creek Off Ramp to Pennsylvania Ave to vehicular traffic during working hours. | The ramp can be closed intermittently with the use of flaggers for a time no greater than 5 mins as shown in the legend on sheet C0.16. The ramp must remain open to other traffic besides the above |
| 38 | Sheets 18 & 19 of 224 - Rock Creek Parkway off ramp to Pennsylvania Ave, NW. The note box on the referenced sheet and the Detour Plan Legend are a bit unclear. Is the off ramp to Penna Ave closed to all but NPS Locks construction traffic during work hours? Must the traffic detour be removed during non-working hours? | The current contract allows the ramp to be closed intermittently with the use of flaggers for a time no greater than 5 mins as shown in the legend on sheet C0.16. The ramp must remain open to other traffic besides the above. If the contractor chooses, for their convenience, to close the ramp for a longer duration than the contractually allotted time, it is the contractor’s responsibility for any additional costs, to permit the closure, and submit a detour plan for NPS approval. |
Revised C01.16 sheet to be issued in next amendment
| 39 | Sheet S10.2 and S10.3 - Detail 1 on sheet S10.3 shows the concrete gravity wall at a height of 6'-6". Detail 1 on sheet S10.2 shows the same wall with a height of 7'-9". Please confirm that the gravity wall on the northeast elevation is to have a height of 7'-9". | MA - Top elevation of wall to be at elevation 43.88' as indicated on 1/S10.3 and 1/S10.2. Bottom elevation of wall may vary with existing stone retaining wall. |
| 40 | Drawing C0.44 for the 34th Street Wall repairs appears to show the same pedestrian detour for the towpath as sheet C0.33 for the Potomac and 33rd Street wall repairs. The referenced temporary impact location on sheet C0.44 calls out 34th Street Wall work that is in fact the Potomac and 33rd Street work location. Please confirm that this pedestrian detour is to be used for 34th Street Wall repairs (in addition to Potomac and 33rd street) and update the temporary impact location if necessary. | The 34th Street Wall work has the same temporary towpath detour plan as that of the Potomac Street Work. Sheet C0.44 has been updated to move the location call out to the actual 34th Street work location in the amendment. |
| 44 | Sheet S3.0, S3.5A, S3.6C - According to the Lock 2 Foundation Plan on sheet S3.0, the Level 2 foundation repair is to be installed at the 9 timber locations shown on the North side and 9 timber locations shown on the South side, for a total of 18 locations. However, this quantity is in direct conflict with the North and South elevation plans. Sheet S3.5A shows foundation repairs at 17 locations on the North side and sheet S3.6C shows foundation repairs at 13 locations on the South side. Please advise. | MA - The size and spacing of existing timbers is unknown, and what is shown on the plan and elevation is based on assumed conditions and may not reflect the number of timbers. The plan is more likely reflective of actual conditions since the elevation is a flat projection of the curved wall. Foundation repairs are to be installed between timbers from the lock gate to the end of the curved wall, as shown on plan and elevation. |
JR: It seems like the issue is that the plan view doesn't agree with the elevation view. These should be coordinated for consistency. When will revised plan be available?
MOVED TO QUESTION 115
| 41 | Sheet S3.3 - Per the Bid Schedule issued in Amendment 1, CLIN 0019 for Lift Lock 2 Foundation Repair has a corresponding quantity of 49 CY. Please clarify how this quantity was calculated. | MA - Bid quantity of 49 CY is based on assumed conditions. |
| 46 | Sheet S3.0, S3.5B, S3.5C, S3.6A, & S3.6B - The Lock 2 Foundation Plan on sheet S3.0 shows the extents of the foundation repairs that are to be installed on the North and South sides per detail 1/S3.3. However, these extents contradict the quantities shown on the elevation plans (sheets S3.5B, S3.5C, S3.6A, and S3.6B). Please advise. | MA - The size and spacing of existing timbers is unknown and what is shown on plan and elevation is based on assumed conditions and may not reflect the number of timbers. Foudation Repairs are to be installed between the concrete splash pad and the existing concrete slab as indicated on plan. |
JR: It seems like the issue is that the plan view doesn't agree with the elevation view. These should be coordinated for consistency. When will revised plan be available?
MOVED TO QUESTION 116
| 42 | C10.1 - Drawing C10.1 shows the area of debris removal, do we need to remove the sediments in the same area as well? | No sediment needs to be removed in this area. (Sorba - SM) |
| 48 | Sheet 1.0, S1.6A, & S1.7A - The Lock 1 Elevation Plans S1.6A and 1.7A show that 7 and 14 foundation repairs are to be performed within the lock on the North and South sides, respectively. There are no concrete foundation repairs indicated on the Lock 1 Foundation Plan on sheet S1.0. Please provide the extents of these foundation repairs. | Foundation repairs are shown on west portion of S1.0 west of the breast wall per 1/S1.3. See response to comment 46 for additional information. |
JR: It seems like the issue is that the plan view doesn't agree with the elevation view. These should be coordinated for consistency. When will revised plan be available?
MOVED TO QUESTION 117
| 43 | Sheet 4/S4.3 - Please provide the rebar details for the 4" concrete slab shown on detail 4/S4.3. The longitudinal and transverse bars shown are not labelled. | Bars are indicated on 4/S4.3 as #4@8" mid and are updated to indicate each way in the amendment. |
| 50 | Sheet S4.5 - Please provide rebar details for the 4x4x2 concrete footing shown beneath the monument on sheet S4.5. | Footing reinforcement is shown on 2/A8.1 |
JR: Are revised plans going to be provided noting as such?
MOVED TO QUESTION 118 BUT MAY HAVE BEEN ANSWERED, MS TO VERIFY
| 44 | S10.2 - Please provide the size and spacing of the U-bar rebar shown within the footing of the new concrete Gravity Wall. | Size and spacing of U-bar will has been updated and is provided in the amendment. |
| 45 | Section 01 11 00, 1.4.K of the Specifications requires the Contractor and sub-contractors to indemnify, defend and hold harmless third parties for the negligence and willful misconduct of the Owner. This is an unlimited and inequitable risk Contractor cannot accept. Please amend to: |
| “For work on the property at 1048 Wisconsin Avenue, Germar Properties and Snyder’s Properties, LLC, The Contractor and sub-contractors shall indemnify, defend and hold Germar and Snyder Properties and all persons claiming by, through or under Germar and Snyder Properties, respectively, harmless of and from any and all loss, cost, damage or expense (including, without limitation, reasonable attorney’s fees and the cost of enforcing this indemnity) (collectively, “Losses”) resulting from any act of negligence or willful misconduct of NPS, the General Contractor, any trade contractors, and their respective successors, assigns, servants, agents, employees, tenants and invitees (the “Indemnifying Parties” relating to (a) the exercise of any of the rights granted hereunder, or (b) the discharge, or failure to discharge, any of the obligations hereunder, but excluding, however, any Losses arising out of the negligence or willful misconduct of Germar and Snyder Properties, or its employees, agents, or contractors. For the purposes of this Agreement, “trade contractor” shall mean all subcontractors, regardless of level, retained by the General Contractor to conduct any work that is directly related to the Property.” | The indemnification clause cannot be changed. | |||
| 46 | The Amendment 3 description states the CLIN Schedule was changed to reflect CLIN 0028 unit of measure to be Lump Sum and not Square Foot but the Schedule was not modified. Please provide the updated Schedule. | A corrected Bid Schedule has been prepared and will be issued with the amendment. | ||
| 47 | There are several inconsistencies in the Bid Schedule Subtotals following the Amendment 1 item deleted. Please address the following: (A) Total Base Price-Schedule 1 (CLIN 0001 through 0022 should be 0001 through 0021); (B) Total Price for All Options (CLIN 0023 through 0030 should be 0022 through 0029); (C) Should a line be added for Total Base Price Schedule 2 ( CLIN 0030 through 0041) ahead of the (D) Total Proposed Price (CLIN 0001 through 0041)? | A corrected Bid Schedule has been prepared and will be issued with the amendment. | ||
| 48 | In reference to Part C Evaluation Factors for Volume II Price Proposal (pg 64-65 of Solicitation), please confirm what the basis of comparison will be. Referring to the previous question subtotal sections (A) Total Base Price CLIN 0001 to 0021; (B) Total Price for All Options CLIN 0022 to 0029; (C) Total Base Price Schedule 2 CLIN 0030 to 0041; will the basis of comparison be the total of all items and options (A+B+C) Total Proposed Price? Please provide the basis of comparison if different. | Please refer to solicitation clause provision "Special Provision 1 - Evaluation of Options" located on page 65. | ||
| 49 | Please confirm if the Options bid items (CLIN 0022 through 0029) are intended to be awarded as a complete package or line by line. The work involved in these option items is connected to other option line items and relies on erosion control, access and traffic control in those items. In order to appropriately price the option items it is necessary to know how they will be awarded so we don't duplicate costs in multiple option items. | Option CLIN Items in the range (0022 - 0029) are not interconnected and may be awarded separately or in any other combination which is determined to be in the Government's best interest. | ||
| 50 | Section f 52.211-12 liquidated damages (LDS) on page 11 of 65 states if the gov terminates the contract, LDS will continue to accrue until complete (regardless of the contractor's ability to complete the work). Please confirm the language is correct that the gov will continue to charge LDS to the contractor even after they have terminated the contract and restricted the contractor from completing the work. If this is your intent it would be almost impossible for the contractor to price this item. | Section F - Clause 52.211-12 Liquidated Damages is incroporated exactly how it shows in the FAR, this clause is added to all Firm-Fixed Price Construction Contracts where Liquidated Damages are to be incorporated into the contract. Please see the clause's FAR prescription 11.503(b). The NPS/DOI does not have authority to alter this clause. | ||
| 51 | Can the gov provide a list of any firms, prime contractors, or subconsultants that were involved in the development of this project's design or specifications and would be prohibited from receiving any part of this construction award per far 36.209 in the instructions for submission? | Contractor is responsible for the identification of all subcontractors. | ||
| 52 | Please revise the standard page size, page 56 second paragraph, b to allow for the organization chart to be a single 11” by 17” sized sheet. | All pages must be in accordance with the solicitation guidelines, this is an electronic submission not a physical hard copy submission. | ||
| 53 | Please confirm the bid due date & time is local to Washington DC (12pm eastern standard time) and not Denver Colorado. | Addressed in question 38 | ||
| 54 | Please confirm the price evaluation preference, shown on page 24, only applies to offerors that are HUBZone small business and does not apply to Small Business that are not HUBZone Small Business. | Refer to Clause 52.219-4 - HubZone | ||
| 55 | Spec Section 01 33 23 Submittal Procedures 1.3 D. Processing Time states we are to allow time for submittal review but the number of days required is left blank. Per 1. Action Submittals a. and b. we intend to include 21 calendar days for Initial Review of each submittal and 7 calendar days for re-submittal Review. Please confirm this is acceptable or provide the intended number of calendars days that should be included. | A revised Sec. 013323 Submittal Procedures, specifying length of time for submittal reviews has been prepared and will be issued with the amendment. | ||
| 56 | The Bid Schedule is not provided as a separate document for submittal. Can a separate bid schedule be provided in Excel format for pricing submittal? | Xcel Version of Sheets sent to CO/CS for revision. | ||
| 57 | Sheet C6.2 shows new vehicular concrete paving that is to be installed at Potomac Ave. Please clarify the limits of new concrete pavement work as the limits of disturbance shown on the Civil site plan conflict with those shown on the Architectural and Structural plans (A6.0 & S6.3). | The limits of disturbance on the Civil Plans is correct. The plan extents of the slab over the wall shown in section 2/S6.3 are shown on civil, not architectural or structural sheets. | ||
| 58 | There is no concrete pavement restoration detail shown on sheet C6.4. Please confirm that the concrete pavment that is to be restored at Potomac Ave is to be composed of one layer of 6" crushed stone subbase material and one layer of 6" of concrete. | Sheet C6.4 will be modified to show a Concrete Pavement Restoration. Contractor shall consider that the asphalt repair and concrete repair will need to match the existing pavement sections and the restoration details are assumed for contractor pricing. Before ordering materials to perform the restoration, Contractor shall determine in the field the exact pavement thicknesses of the existing asphalt and existing concrete pavement sections. A credit shall be given to the Government if the results of the field test determine the pavement thicknesses are less than the assumed pavement restoration detail. The new Concrete Pavement Restoration Detail will state this requirement. The Asphalt Pavement Restoration Detail will be modified in a similar circumstance. Drawing has been updated in the amendment. | ||
| 59 | Drawing C6.1 note 2 indicates to remove existing wooden fence and salvage the existing trash receptacles within fence. Please confirm wooden fence shall be reinstalled. | Sheet C6.1 and Sheet A6.0 both note to remove the existing fencing while the existing trash receptacles are to be salvaged. The wooden fence is not to be reinstalled. | ||
| 60 | Please provide a specification section for pipe relining. | Pipe relining specifications are included within Specification Section 334100 Storm Utility Drainage Piping. See 1.4.E, 2.5, and 3.9. | ||
| 61 | 061900 Timber Miter Gates section 1.1 states that "Fit of the gates at Lock | |||
| 5 and the Guard Lock shall be tight with not less than 20 gpm leakage." [emphasis added] Does NPS intend that the gates leak at least 20 GPM? In any case, how is the leakage rate to be measured? | This statement has been revised to "Fit of the gates at Lock 5 and the Guard Lock shall be limited to 20 gpm or less of leakage." Specification has been modified to clarify this in the ammendment. | |||
| 62 | Details 3, 4, 5 and 6 - Clarify if/where the Scum Gutter gate is to be installed. The existing gates designated for replacement do not currently have a scum gutter gate. | Location of scum gutter will be clarified in drawing revision. Will issue revised specification to clarify in next ammendment. | ||
| ****Please note we will not take questions after March 23,2023*** Bids due 12:00 ET 4/20*** | ||||
| C |
Amendment 0005
| Posted: 3/29/2023 | 63 | Sheet S21.1 - Specify the concrete type/mix for the vertical wall patch repair shown on Detail 1/S21.1. Is this concrete meant to be self-consolidating concrete? | Not intended to be self-consolidating concrete. Patch material has been added to the concrete specification in the amendment | |
| 64 | Sheet S10.2 - According to detail 1 on sheet S10.2, flowable fill is to be poured at the backside of the lock wall. No extents are provided for the limits of the flow fill and this can be a significant volume. Please confirm that the flowable fill will be poured along the length of the concrete cutoff wall, which is 16'-0". Also confirm that this scope of work should be included in CLIN 0007 - Guard Lock - Concrete Wall. | Flowable fill extents is intended to be limited by the north, east and west retaining walls shown on S10.0 and limits of excavation on the south. Clarification to flowable fill quantity has been amended in CLIN 0004. | ||
| 65 | S10.0, S10.1, & S10.2 - Guard lock plan view does not show any sediment removal limits, but cross section S10.1 and S10.2 require sediment excavation to allow wall rebuilding. Please provide a similar drawing as S8.0 for lock 5, showing the limits in plan view, this will help with pricing. | Limits of sediment removal are intended to match approximate limits of excavation on S10.0. The drawings have been modified in the Amendment to show approximate limits of excavation across the canal. | ||
| 66 | Sheet 2/S4.3 - According to detail 2/S4.3, the existing brick pavers and concrete slab are to be removed and only the brick pavers are to be re-installed. However, a new 4" concrete slab is shown. Please provide rebar details for this new slab. | Rebar details are provided in Section 4/S4.3 | ||
| 67 | Sheet S7.1 - Please provide rebar details for the 2' deep concrete footings shown on sheet S7.1 at the 34th St wall. | The existing stone to remain is assumed to be irregular in elevation and width. An unreinforced concrete mass without reinforcing is the desgin intent. | ||
| 68 | S3.2 & Bid Option 7 - Drawing S3.2 shows a note: "Remove vegetation; repoint the existing mortared stone wall," pointing at the north wall. Please confirm the removal of vegetation is only on the vertical wall and there is no need to clean the level 2 canal floor. The same drawing mentions Bid Option 7, but the name of the option is "Level 2 South Wall Repairs," which is a different location from the intended work shown on drawing S3.2. | Cleaning the canal floor is not required; however sediment removal to the canal elevation is expected as indicated in detail 2. Work included in Bid Option 7 has been clarified on sheet S3.2 in the future amendment | ||
| 69 | Section 04 99 98 - Please confirm that grouting operations will be paid for as part of the lump sum bid for CLINs 0015, 0026, and 0036. | Section 049998 is for Permeation Grouting. The only permeation grouting called for on the plans is at CLIN 026 Level 1 North Wall Permeation Grouting. See Section 040307 for grouting stone masonry. | ||
| 70 | Please provide a specification section for the fencing. | Please refer to detail 3 on Drawing 8.0 for the wood railing at Lock #1. All black locust is to be #1 grade or better. | ||
| 71 | Section 31 32 23 - Permeation grouting applies to CLIN 0026: Level 1 North Wall. Is the grouting for CLINs 0015 and 0036 also permeation grouting? If not, please provide specs for the grouting at these areas. | Section 049998 is for Permeation Grouting. The only permeation grouting called for on the plans is at the Level 1 North Wall. See Section 040307 for grouting stone masonry. | ||
| 72 | Please provide specifications for the mix design for the self-consolidating concrete. What is the desired compressive strength for the mix? | Self-Consolidating Concrete mix design requirements has been added to the concrete specification in the amendment | ||
| 73 | Owner Bid Schedule - Please clarify the quantity of 700 CF for CLIN 0007 - Guard Lock - Concrete Wall. There are three new concrete walls that are to be poured at Guard Lock, including the gravity wall, cutoff wall, and stone support wall as shown on S10.1. S10.2 and S10.3. The cubic footage of these concrete elements exceeds the given quantity of 700 CF. | The quantity of concrete walls in CLIN 0007 has been revised in the amendment. | ||
| 74 | CLIN 0031, 0034, 0037 do not specify to use Salvaged or New Stone as the other items do. We interpret Section 01 27 00 Definition of Contract Line Items as follows: EE CLIN 0031 34th St Wall Mortared Stone Reconstruction consists of all work to disassemble and reconstruction stone masonry walls (using Salvaged Stone). HH CLIN 0034 Potomac St Wall Mortared Stone Reconstruction consists of all work to disassemble and reconstruction the existing stone masonry walls (using Salvaged Stone). KK CLIN 0037 Grace St Wall Mortared Stone Wall Facade consists of all work to construct a mortared stone facing as indicated (using New Stone). Please confirm this is the gov intent. | A minimum additional quantity of new stone to be provided will be added to CLIN 0031 and CLIN 0034. No separate payment will be made for new stone vs salvage existing. | ||
| 75 | Detail 1 on sheet A8.0 shows that the reinstalled brick pavers are to be set on top of a 3" concrete base with 6" of 57 stone. Sheet A1.0 do not call for demolition of existing concrete base and excavation of existing stone. Confirm the demolition and disposal of the existing subbase benath the existing brick pavers that are to be salvaged and reinstalled. | The entire sidewalk assembly is to removed in the areas indicated. This includes the pavers, concrete slab, and any gravel the slab is sititng on. | ||
| 76 | Earthwork specification mentions a low-permeability fill such as clay material used for repairs to canal liners and any seepage cuts, and the geotechnical report also mentions a compacted soil clay liner. Contract drawings do not show any detail of the thickness, location, or coverage of the soil clay liner; is the intent to backfill with soil clay liner where sediments were removed for foundation repairs? Please clarify | The thickness of the existing clay liner varies. Earthwork specification has been updated in the amendment to require placement of a 24 inch liner in areas where the existing clay liner is disturbed. | ||
| 77 | The note on Detail 2 on sheet S3.3 states, "Remove and dispose of existing planking. Document existing planking prior to removal and give NPS 2 weeks notice perior to removal. Do not damage existing wood foundation timbers." Are these planks and the existing timbers able to withstand the load of moving concrete trucks and vacuum-excavation trucks? These equipment are needed to perform the foundation repairs at Lock 1 and Lock 2. | Damage to the Existing Foundation Timbers is not allowed as per note on Detail 2. Do not use concrete trucks or other equipment which may damage the timbers. The means and methods of accomplishing the work are the contractor's responsibility. | ||
| 78 | S1.1 calls for remove and reinstall Lock 1 upper gates and remove and replace Lock 1 lower gates. The lower gate miter sill is generally underwater but the upper gate miter sill exposed and appears heavily degraded. Should bidders assume modifications or new miters are required? If so please clarify. | Refer to S1.0 where there are notes indicating that both miter sills are to remain. Also refer to specification 061900 for requirements for removing the upstream gate at Lock 1. | ||
| 79 | The note on sheet S4.5 states "Brick Pavers, see Arch Dwgs," at the location adjacent to the monument on 1946 Wisconsin. Architectural drawing A4.0 only shows the extents of the brick pavers that are to be salvaged and reinstalled. Confirm that the slab beneath these pavers is not to be demolished and installed new. | See arch detail 2/A8.0 - the existing aggregate base, slab, and bricks (to be salvaged) are to be removed and replaced (salvaged bricks to be reinstalled). This detail illustrates tying the new paving assembly into the existing. Detail and sheet title on S4.5 have been changed to 1062 Wisconsin in the amendment. | ||
| 80 | Detail 1 on A4.0 requires the "removal and salvage" of existing railings. Detail 1 on A4.1 indicates the existing railing is to be "reinstalled". Since the existing railing is grouted into the stone coping, removal of the railing will require it to be cut off above the stone and thus not able to be reused. According to the definitions in Spec 01 35 91, confirm that Detail 1 on A4.0 and A4.1 should be revised to "Remove and Replace". Also correct Dwg A8.1 to reflect the correct scope in Details 3, 8 and 12 | The design intent is to retain (not replace with new) the existing railings as noted in the drawings. To remove the railings, the horizontal member should be cut at the corresponding stone head joints. This will allow each stone section with the railing still attached to be removed. Upon reinstallation, the railing sections should be welded back together at the cuts with the welds ground smooth. The railing is believed to be a combination of stainless steel and wrought iron. The Contractor is responsible for testing the metals and selecting the correct temperature and welding rods. After reinstallation and welding, the entire railing should be painted as specified. | ||
| 81 | Regarding Detail 2, confirm the requirement for casting removal applies to both quoin posts at the upstream gates of Lock 5. Also confirm that stone/concrete rehabilitation behind the castings is not required. Confirm that the approximate quantity is at least 12 given the number that are visible above the water level. Finally, confirm if the sand-blasted castings are to be re-coated with any paint system. | It is assumed question is referring to detail 2-S8.4. Casting is to be removed for both quoin posts at the upstream gates of Lock 5. Stone repairs behind the existing castings is not anticipated. Per note 2 on S8.4 eight castings per quoin post is assumed. Castings to be painted similar to lock gate hardware with primer & two coats of black paint. This has been clarified in on the drawings in the amendment. | ||
| 82 | Section 1.4 - Materials. Clarify if the preservative treatment is to be applied to the individual timbers after cutting and shaping, but prior to final assembly, or to the entire gate assembly after fabrication. | The Design intent is that individual timbers will be treated, including retreatment after any cuts made after initial treatment, as specified. | ||
| 83 | The current bridge over Lock 5 has longitudinal planking similar to that shown in Detail 3 of S9.4 for the inlet canal bridge. Detail 4 on S9.3 does not show any new longitudinal planking. Confirm that longitudinal planking for the Lock 5 bridge replacement is not required. | Longitudinal planking is not required for the Lock 5 bridge. | ||
| 84 | Section 2.7 and 2.8 - Confirm that the bridge girders, stiffeners, x-bracing and outriggers are to be painted only and not hot-dip galvanized. | Per specification 051200 section 2.8 bridge beams shall be painted. Specification have been clarified in the amendment to include the stiffeners, x-bracing and outrigger and remove galvanization | ||
| 85 | Detail 1 on sheet S10.2 shows stainless steel sock anchors embedded within the new concrete cutoff wall. Provide the spacing of these anchors along the wall. | Provide anchors spaced at 24" on center. Detail 1-S10.2 have been clarified in the drawing amendment. | ||
| 86 | Specification section 01 50 00 2.2.B states that the “Contracting Officers Field Office: shall be located at the Georgetown Visitor Center”. Specification Section 01 50 00 3.3.B.2. states that “Provide office, furnishings, and utility connections no later than 7 days after date of Notice to Proceed. Exact location will be determined by Contracting Officer.” Please clarify that the Contracting Officer Field Office will be located in the Georgetown Visitor Center and no field office or utility connections will need to be provided by Contractor. | See responses to questions 23, 24, 25, and 26 of Amendment 004. | ||
| 87 | The Bid Schedule CLIN 0026 Option 5: Level 1 North Wall description does not match the description from Spec Section 01 27 00 Z. CLIN 0026 Bid Option 5a Level 1 North Wall Permeation Grouting. Please confirm the bid option numbers and item descriptions are meant to be the same for CLIN 0026 Option 5 Level 1 Permeation Grouting 1 LS; and add additional bid items/descriptions if needed. | Bid schedule and specification section 012700 will be corrected to match. | ||
| 88 | Drawings S6.3 and S6.4 for 1046 Potomac St Wall Repairs show a concrete foundation, however there is no CLIN for concrete at Potomac St. Similarly the 34th St Wall has a concrete foundation and does include CLIN 0032 for concrete paid by the CF. Please confirm if the concrete foundation is incidental to CLIN 0033 Potomac St Wall 1 LS. If not please add a separate bid item for concrete foundation. | Concrete foundation at Potomac Street Wall is incidental to CLIN 0033 Potomac St Wall | ||
| 89 | With the amount takeoff and pricing required for the various lump sum items, and remaining questions awaiting responses we request the gov extend the bid date by 2 weeks beyond the current bid date which falls during the Easter holiday week? | Solicitation has already been extended the requested 2 - weeks to April 20. | ||
| 90 | The access point shown on sheet C0.41 from 34th Street NW is at the end of the road next to public parking. Please allow the contractor to close public parking at the end of 34th Street NW to allow construction vehicles to access the site. | This area is outside of NPS Jurisdiction, the contractor may coordinate with DDOT as part of their established permit workflows to potentially include these areas in their Occupancy Permit. | ||
| 91 | Erosion Control plans indicate placing a sandbag cofferdam at 34th Street and Grace Street. No bypass piping is shown connecting the two areas. How is the contractor to handle water backing up behind the sandbag cofferdam during rain events? | There is no diversion pipe that bypasses clean water around the disturbed area between Wisconsin Avenue and 34th Street because Cofferdam 1-3 is designed to be constructed with enough height to impound upstream water and direct water through the Canal’s upstream waste weirs (outlets) - the nearest of which is at Foundry Branch (Mile Marker 1.5). | ||
| 92 | Sheet S3.2 calls out removing vegetation along the North wall of Level 2. Is the contractor required to spray herbicide where vegetation is removed prior to repointing? Do any additional walls require vegetation to be removed and herbicide application in Level 2? | Herbicide is to be applied according to detail 3/S21.0, after removing vegetation. Vegetation removal is required within designated work areas on the north and south walls of Level 2. | ||
| 93 | Equipment access to the Guard Lock is to be from the towpath between Locks 5 & 6. Since equipment and trucks will be tracking back and forth along this section of towpath, there is a high probability of damage the existing path. What are the expectations for repair and resurfacing of the towpath from Lock 5 to the Guard Lock? Please provide a contingent bid item for repairing these sections of towpath due to unknown quantity of repairs. | The contractor is responsible for repairing damage to the towpath, adjacent historic structures (including but not limited to locks, walls, etc.), and other features on park property to equivalent or better than the pre-construction condition caused by use as a haul route and construction operations. Contractor shall take photo documentation to establish pre-existing conditions prior to mobilization of the site and submit to COR per Specification 013233 and 311400.1.5.A. Any anticipated costs should be included within existing CLINs and listed separately in the submitted schedule of values. | ||
| 94 | Tree growth along the towpath from Lock 5 to the Guard Lock restrict the towpath down to 8' in certain sections. Is it acceptable to temporarily widen sections of the towpath toward the canal to allow for equipment access? | No temporary towpath widening will be allowed. The following has been added to Section 011100 of the specifications. Confine all operations to within the work limits of the project. Prevent damage to natural surroundings. Restore damaged areas repairing or replacing damaged trees and planted, at no additional expense to the Government. Where existing branches of trees extend into the construction access route, work areas, and at other construction operations near trees and plants, identify the plants and tree branches of concern. Submit the locations and methods for pruning limbs interfering with Intended equipment access for approval to the Contracting Officer. Pruning is considered to be incidental to project mobilization/demobilization costs. If pruning is determined to be required, trees shall be assessed by a |
current International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified arborist or ISA board certified master arborist to determine the most prudent work prescription. Pruning for to provide clearance shall be performed to the minimal extent necessary to facilitate the work while maintaining health and aesthetics. All work shall be performed/completed in accordance with the most current version ANSI A300 Standards (Part 1). All prescribed work must be completed under the supervision of an ISA certified arborist. Hard lines are prohibited: trees shall be pruned to have soft aesthetic lines and a natural form to the extent possible trees should be pruned with consideration for the health and aesthetics of the entire grouping, not trees in singularity. Reasonable symmetry of form and linear progression should be maintained throughout the grouping. All debris and green waste shall be removed from the park boundary. The following shall be provided to the Government:
a. ISA arborist certification ID number for assessing arborist
b. ISA arborist certification ID number for arborist supervising work (prior to work…
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .