GOGA_319315_Solicitation_Question_and_Answers_1_0004.pdf

Q&A1

Question 1. Provide the condition survey or bridge inspection report and its date.

On what field investigation are the concrete repair locations and quantities based, and on what date was that investigation performed at each structure? Please provide the bridge inspection report(s), condition assessment, sounding or chain-drag survey, delamination map and field notes relied on by the designer.

The drawing set carries a title-block date of 7/17/2026 and a plot date of 7/20/26, with no revision entries and no note anywhere in the 46 sheets identifying the survey or inspection behind the existing conditions. The only statement in the set about the basis of existing conditions is SE2 note 3 at Point Bonita Viaduct: "SURVEY WAS NOT PROVIDED FOR THIS

SITE. STORM DESIGN IS BASED OFF LIDAR DATA."

Answer¿ The Government performed initial scoping on November 2024 and April 2026 to validate FHWA inspection findings and confirm what is documented in those reports to move forward under the Bridge Preservation Program efforts. Those reports will not be shared as the Government has determined what scope items to move forward with and those scope items are shown in the construction documents.

The goal of bridge preservation is to perform regular maintenance activities that a Park may not have the resources to self-perform.

Question 2. Confirm how deterioration between the survey date and construction will be handled.

Spalling and delamination progress with time and exposure, and these are marine and coastal structures. Depending on the answer to Question 1, the field data behind these quantities may be a year or more old by the time work begins, and the seasonal restrictions in 01 11 00 1.7.B may push the Point Lobos and Crissy Field work into a later work window still.

Will the Government re-survey and mark the repair limits before or at the start of performance, and will growth between the survey date and the sounding required by 03 30 30 3.1.A.1 be treated as a change under FAR 52.243-4 oras a differing site condition under FAR 52.236-2?

Answer¿ The Government will handle further deterioration/change in quantities between the scoping date and construction through contract modification procedures. The Government will have a CMR on site to be the eyes and ears of the Government and to help coordinate these issues.

Question 3. Reconcile the "reference only" plan note with the CO-directed repair limits in 03 30 30. Which governs for payment: the plan-sheet note making the Contractor responsible for field measuring quantities, or Spec 03 30 30 3.1.A.1 and the repair details, which require the limits of each repair to be sounded and marked in the presence of the CO and prohibit the Contractor from enlarging a repair without contacting the CO or COR?

Answer¿ The quantities shown in plan are for reference only to provide a document that is biddable. Any work that would go beyond the scope shown in the plans not previously identified through award would be handled through contract modification if the Government agreed additional quantities are warranted.

Specifically: when the Contractor sounds a structure in the presence of the CO and the marked limits exceed the areas indicated on the drawings, is the additional area a change to the contract, or is it included in the lump-sum price? Please answer this one directly — it is the single question that determines how Yerba Buena prices this scope.

Question 4. Convert Spec 03 30 30 concrete repair to unit-priced line items.

We request that the Government amend Attachment 4 to establish unit-priced sub-line items for structural concrete repair, with the drawing quantities carried as the Government's estimated quantities, priced and evaluated as follows:

a. Separate unit prices per square foot for Repair Type A (trowel-applied, 1" maximum depth, 12" maximum dimension) and Repair Type B (formed, flowable structural patch concrete with screw anchors, greater than 12" and 3" to 4" depth), because the two are not interchangeable in cost.

b. Measurement by the actual area of repair authorized and marked by the CO under 03 30 30 3.1.A.1, verified by joint field measurement before the repair is placed.

c. Incorporation of FAR 52.211-18, Variation in Estimated Quantity, so that quantities varying more than 15 percent above or below the estimate are subject to equitable adjustment. That clause is not currently in the solicitation, which is consistent with an all-lump-sum schedule but leaves no mechanism for the variation this scope invites.

This structure prices the known work competitively and pays the actual work at pre-agreed rates. It removes the hidden-condition contingency Yerba Buena’s offer of lump sum and removes the need for a change order negotiation in the field each time a marked repair runs long.

Answer¿ The Government shall not convert Spec 03 30 30 to unit price. See answers to Question 2 and 3.

Question 5. If the line items remain lump sum, confirm the quantities as a stated not-to-exceed basis of price.

If the Government elects to keep CLINs 1 through 14 as lump sum, we request that the amendment state that the concrete repair quantities shown in the drawing QUANTITIES tables are the contractual basis of the lump-sum prices, and that repair authorized by the CO in excess of those quantities is a change entitling the Contractor to an equitable adjustment under FAR 52.243-4.

We would propose language substantially as follows: "The concrete repair quantities shown in the drawing QUANTITIES tables are the maximum quantities included in the lump-sum prices for Contract Line Items 1 through 14. Repair areas sounded, marked and authorized by the Contracting Officer under Section 03 30 30, paragraph 3.1.A.1 in excess of those quantities constitute a change under FAR 52.243-4 and will be adjusted at the unit prices established in the Contractor's price breakdown. Quantities below those shown will be deducted on the same basis."

A stated maximum with a two-way adjustment protects the Government as much as [the contractor] and it makes underruns recoverable rather than absorbed into a lump sum.

Answer¿ The Government agrees with this addition.

Question 6. Confirm the Type A / Type B split of the 300 SF at Point Bonita Trail Bridge.

The SD2 quantity table shows a single line, "REPAIR SPALLED CONCRETE 300 SF," while the plan callouts identify Type B work on girders A and B and a separate Type A curb spall of approximately 10" x 6" x 1" deep. How much of the 300 SF does the Government estimate as Type B, and is the curb spall included in the 300 SF or additional to it? The same question applies to the 20 SF backwall and the 2 SF deck patch — please confirm both are Type A.

Answer¿ Plan and elevation sheet gives types of each repair. Deck repair and backwall repair are Type A, all others are Type B. The estimated quantity is for all repairs combined.

The dimensions are given for the Type B repairs. Type A repairs are estimated to be 20 SF.

Question 7. Confirm how repair depth is measured and paid.

Repair Type B is shown at "3" +/-" on SC3 and "4" +/-" on SD3, and SF3 shows "±3"".

Removal depth drives cost far more than face area, and the depth actually required is not known until the unsound material is removed. If the line items remain lump sum, on what depth is the Contractor to base its price? If the line items are converted to unit prices, will the Government establish separate unit prices by depth band, or a single unit price with the depth stated as a basis of measurement?

Answer¿ Contractors should price as shown in the plans. Anything that goes beyond the reference quantities unless previously agreed upon through the award process would be processed as a modification.

Question 8. Confirm the treatment of exposed and damaged reinforcing steel.

Spec 03 30 30 3.1.B.3.c requires the Contractor to "replace or repair damaged reinforcing steel," and 3.1.B.4 requires a minimum 1" clear removal around any bar with more than half its diameter exposed. No quantity of reinforcing steel is shown on any sheet, no line item exists for it, and no lap, splice or coupler detail is provided.

How is reinforcing steel replacement to be priced and paid? We request that it be established as a unit-priced item (per pound or per linear foot by bar size) with an estimated quantity, or that the Government confirm it is a change when encountered.

Answer¿ No rebar repair included on plans. Contractor to contact CO if they encounter damaged or compromised rebar to determine if repair is needed and will be paid under contract amendment. Regarding additional concrete removal around rebar that is exposed more than half its diameter, Contractor can assume up to 3 inches of rebar at 8 locations and up to 30 lineal feet on Point Lobos Viaduct.

Question 9. Confirm the treatment of the stop-work condition at multiple reinforcing layers.

Spec 03 30 30 3.1.B.6 requires removal to stop and the CO and EOR to be contacted if more than one layer of reinforcing is exposed. Please confirm that time and cost from that stoppage, including standby and remobilization to the affected structure, will be compensated under FAR 52.243-4 or 52.236-2, and state the Government's target response time for a design determination in that circumstance. Access to Point Bonita Trail Bridge, the Bonita Tunnel Entrance and the truss bridges is constrained enough that a stop-and-return is a material cost, not an inconvenience.

Answer¿ The Government confirms this is correct.

Question 10. Quantify the exposed rebar cleaning and sealing at Point Lobos Viaduct.

Sheet SC4 calls out "CLEAN EXPOSED REBAR ON DECK UNDERSIDE AND COAT WITH APPROVED SEALANT" in two locations and cleaning of exposed rebar at railing caps, none of which appears in the SC2 QUANTITIES table. Please provide the estimated quantity or confirm that this work is to be carried as an allowance and adjusted to actual. (SC4 also references the repair detail as being on sheet SE3; we read that as a typographical error for SC3 and ask that it be confirmed.)

Answer¿ Photographs on sheet SC4 that indicate work is “CLEAN EXPOSED REBAR […] AND COAT WITH APPROVED SEALANT” indicate concrete patching on caps and deck called out on plan and elevation sheet, cleaning rebar is part of concrete repair detail. Repair details referenced on SC4 are on sheet SC3, not SE4 as noted.

Question 11. Confirm the color-match sample process for repair mortar.

Spec 03 30 30 1.4.C requires a concrete mortar sample for CO verification that the pigment matches the surrounding concrete, and 3.3.B.5 requires the repair mortar to be pigmented to match. Concrete at these structures varies in color across and within each bridge. How many trial mixes and submittal cycles should offerors carry, is a single approved mix acceptable across all six structures, and will the Government accept a reasonable-match standard rather than a per-location match?

Answer¿ Contractor may initially provide a single sample for comparison at all sites. CO may direct Contractor to provide alternative sample(s) at specific sites until color is matched sufficiently as decided by CO.

Question 12. Establish a general quantity basis for the lump-sum line items.

We request that the Government confirm by amendment, for all lump-sum line items, that the quantities shown in them drawing QUANTITIES tables are the basis on which lump-sum prices are established, and that work directed in excess of those quantities is a change under FAR 52.243-4 while work below them is a credit to the Government.

Absent that confirmation, the plan-sheet note appears to transfer unlimited quantity risk to the Contractor for conditions that the solicitation itself does not define and that offerors cannot measure during the proposal period. That risk gets priced. We would rather price the work.

Answer¿.The Government confirms that for all lump-sum line items the quantities shown in the tables are the basis on which the lump sum pricing is established. See response to question 3 regarding contract modifications regarding quantity change.

Question 13. Provide the hazardous material characterization for the Point Lobos Viaduct debris.

Spec 01 11 00 1.7.C.4 states the material to be removed from under the viaduct "should be considered hazardous," and 1.7.D.2 requires the Contractor to deliver hazardous materials surveys and characterizations to the Park PM. No characterization, waste profile or estimated tonnage is included in the solicitation, and the only quantity given is an area of

4,128 SF.

Please provide the characterization and the estimated tonnage, identify who is responsible for sampling and profiling the waste, and confirm whether this item can be converted to a unit price per ton with a Government estimated quantity. Disposal facilities price by ton and by profile; an area alone cannot be priced without a large contingency.

Answer¿ Exact nature of hazardous materials is unknown due to access limitations.

Contractor to anticipate items typical from extended occupation by individuals experiencing homelessness, including mattresses, blankets, food waste, and other forms of trash. Contractors shall assume presence of biohazardous materials including human feces and possibility of medical waste such as needles.

Assume 72 cubic yards of material as described above is to be removed, additional volume shall be paid by amendment to the contract. The volume above does not include removal of the grating.

Question 14. Provide the lead-based paint survey or confirm the assumption.

Spec 09 91 90 3.2 and 3.3 require lead-based paint containment, encapsulant primer and disposal in accordance with SSPC Guide 6 and Guide 7 and 29 CFR 1926.62, but no lead survey or hazardous materials characterization for the existing coatings is included. Please provide the survey for the guardrail at Easkoot Creek Bridge and the bridge and approach rails at Point Bonita Trail Bridge or confirm that offerors are to assume all existing coatings are lead containing and price full containment accordingly.

Answer¿ Lead was detected in all surfaces to be repainted. Containment required for any paint striping activities.

Question 15. Confirm the grout volume basis for the wingwall undermining repair.

The SC2 quantity table shows "REPAIR UNDERMINING 2 SF," and the SC3 detail directs the Contractor to form, seal and pump grout from the bottom of the void until grout appears at the vent. The 2 SF describes the face of the form, not the void behind it. Please provide the estimated grout volume or establish a unit price per cubic yard of grout with an estimated quantity.

Answer¿ Final volume of grout to be placed will be dependent on the volume of loose material removed. Volume is estimated to be 1 cubic foot maximum.

Question 16. Correct the CLIN-to-structure mapping.

Spec 01 27 00 numbers the Point Bonita structures 0006 Truss Bridge #1, 0007 Truss Bridge #2 and 0008 Tunnel Entrance Bridge. Attachment 4 and Section B number the same structures 6 Tunnel Entrance, 7 Truss Bridge #1 and 8 Truss Bridge #2. Please confirm the correct mapping and issue a corrected Price Schedule, since the scope, access and cost of the tunnel entrance work differ materially from the truss bridge work.

Answer¿.The.Contract.Price.Schedule.has.been.revised.and.included.in.the.amendment¡

Question 17. Correct the option numbering and confirm how Option 4 is evaluated.

Attachment 4 labels CLIN 13 "OPTION 2" and CLIN 14 "OPTION 3," while Section B and Spec 01 27 00 label the same items Option 3 and Option 4. Separately, Option 4 (CLIN 14) is the same physical work as Options 2 and 3 performed without wheeled or tracked equipment on the beach. If all option prices are added to the base price for evaluation, the Point Lobos under-deck work is counted twice.

Please confirm whether CLIN 14 is priced in lieu of CLINs 12 and 13, and state how the option prices will be summed for evaluation and for award.

Answer¿.CLINs.78.and.79.should.be.priced.as.if.tracked.equipment.were.permitted.on.the.

beach¡.CLIN.70.should.be.the.price.difference.of.not.being.able.to.use.equipment.on.the.

beach.for.CLIN.69?.CLIN.78?.and.CLIN.79¡

Question 18. Confirm the pricing basis for Option 1 at Crissy Field Channel Bridge.

Option 1 (CLIN 11) replaces the deck planks "in lieu of planing existing deck." If Option 1 is exercised, the 2,016 SF of planning and preservative treatment priced in CLIN 9 is not performed. Should CLIN 9 be priced with the planning included and a deduct taken at exercise, or will the Government issue a deductive modification? Please confirm how the two are evaluated together.

Answer¿.For.evaluation.purposes.total.proposal.cost.is.considered¡.CLIN.77.should.be.the.

additional.cost.for.replacing.the.decking¡.The.Government.would.issued.a.deducted.

modification.if.CLIN.77.is.exercised.to.remove.the.planing.from.the.scope¡

Question 19. Reconcile the seasonal work restrictions with the 200-day performance period.

Spec 01 11 00 1.7.B prohibits tree removal between January 1 and August 31, removal of vegetation over 8" between March 1 and July 31, and any work at Point Lobos Viaduct or Crissy Field between July 1 and May 15. The last of these leaves roughly a six-week window each year for CLINs 3, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14. Against the 200 calendar day period of performance announced in the pre-solicitation notice, and liquidated damages of $2,261 per calendar day under FAR 52.211-12, this appears infeasible without either an extended period of performance or an exception.

Please confirm the intended sequence or extend the performance period to accommodate the restricted windows. If the Government intends the work to span more than one seasonal window, please confirm that the period of performance stated in Block 11 of the SF 1442 accounts for it.

Answer¿ Tree removal is only for part of work on CLIN 2. This task has an approximately 6 month window to complete.

The six week window at Point Lobos Viaduct and Crissy Field only affects CLIN 2 and CLIN

9. Contractor should plan for multiple crews if necessary to complete the work in this window. Restrictions on CLIN 2 and CLIN 9 are depending on presence of nesting birds;

Contractor to coordinate with CO during construction regarding nesting conditions during construction to determine if there is additional time for the work window. The CO cannot guarantee additional time until nesting survey is performed during the nesting season and then only if no nesting animals are observed.

Question 20. Confirm permit responsibility at Point Lobos Avenue and the Great Highway.

Point Lobos Avenue and the Great Highway are City and County of San Francisco streets.

Sheet TC1 provides sign spacing for Easkoot Creek and Rodeo Lagoon only. Please confirm which permits are Government-furnished under Spec 01 31 00 1.2 and which the Contractor is to obtain, specifically the City encroachment or street-use permit for traffic control at CLIN 3 and the Point Lobos options.

Answer¿ 01 31 00 Section 1.9 Permits states that Construction Contractor shall […] be responsible for obtaining necessary licenses and permits. There are no Government Furnished Permits.

Question 21. Confirm whether a Contracting Officer field office is required.

Spec 01 50 00 2.3.D describes a Contracting Officer's field office with a detailed furnishing list — two desks, two drafting tables, drawing rack, filing cabinets, refrigerator, computer work station and so on. The requirement is not repeated in Section H, and no field office is shown on any staging plan. Please confirm whether the field office is required, and if so at which of the five locations, as it is a material general conditions cost across a 200-day period.

Related: Spec 01 50 00 2.3.C requires a high-speed internet connection between "the project's DDC system" and the internet, maintained through the warranty period. This scope contains no direct digital control system. Please confirm that 2.3.C does not apply to this contract.

Answer¿ The Government confirms that a field office is not required. The Government confirms that 2.3.C. does not apply to this contract.

Question 22. Confirm the wage determination covers all classifications in this scope.

Attachment 3 carries a decision dated 07/14/2026. Please confirm that classifications for certified arborist and tree trimmer, painter performing removal of hazardous coatings under SSPC QP2, and any over-water or diver classification are covered, or advise whether a conformance request under FAR 52.222-6 will be required after award.

Answer¿.Positions not classified within the Wage Determination will be handled via FAR 52.222-6.

Question 23. Extend the proposal due date if the pricing structure is amended.

If the Government converts any line item to unit pricing or otherwise amends the measurement and payment basis, we request a corresponding extension of the September 14, 2026 proposal due date so that offerors and their subcontractors can re-price on the amended basis. If the structure is unchanged, no extension is requested on our account.

Answer¿ The Government is not converting any line item to unit pricing, the contract remains lump sum and therefore the proposal due date shall not be extended.