B09_Amendment_2_Attachment_17_-_Questions_and_Answers_0002.docx

Questions and Answers for Solicitation 140P3022R0021

1. Section C.2 of the solicitation (page 6 of 64) calls for a contractor with experience in historic masonry and restoring roadways. These appear to be the primary elements of work whereas the Section M, Sub-Factor 5 – Past Performance, calls for projects that “specifically required the establishment of cofferdams.” The small dikes/berms required for the cofferdams seem to be very small portions of the work. Please review and clarify if Sub-Factor 5 is correct or should be historic masonry experience and roadway rehabilitation.

0. This has been revised to as follows. “The offeror may coordinate completion of the form entitled "Past Performance Questionnaire" in the Attachment 11 - Proposal Submission Package for construction projects of the same scope and complexity as the contemplated contract which required work with historic masonry, heavy civil features (ex. Excavation, concrete, roadwork. Etc.), and work in proximity to water.”

1. Section C.4 of the solicitation says a “wall drain system will be added behind the reconstructed masonry wall.” Can you please confirm this is not part of the final design or provide where this wall drain design is located in the plans?

1. The description provided in Section C.4 (purpose) was a superseded description. Final design plans and specifications did not require a wall drain system and was not included. Please refer to the plans and specifications for components required for reconstruction of the wall.

1. Please provide the recent 2021 Temporary Traffic Control Plan that is referenced in 01 11 00, 1.11.D.2.

2. The electronic PDF of previously approved Traffic Control Plan for the slope stabilization project on Harpers Ferry Road downstream of the current work area in 2021 is attached.

1. When does the Government anticipate receiving the permits listed in 01 11 00, 1.11.D.5?

3. Joint Permit Application MDE Waterway and Wetland & USACE – Tracking Number #202261086 – Permit Number 22-NT-3149. Application was received June 15, 2022. Per MDE’s correspondence, their goal is to complete the review within 180 days of receipt. This action is considered a minor project and considered a Category A project under the USACE MDSPGP-6.

3. MDE Erosion and Sediment Control & Stormwater Management Waiver – MDE No. 22-SF-0189. MDE responded on June 30, 2022, that stormwater management waiver under Section 3.3.A is applicable for this project. Currently addressing minor comments with engineer of record for resubmission.

3. Currently NPS anticipates authorization of pending permits prior to mobilization of contractor.

1. Please clarify if paragraph 1.4.A under 01 35 91 is meant to be the Historic Stone Masonry Contractor or if this is a third-party inspection agency providing quality control?

4. Paragraph 1.4.A for a historic preservation treatment specialist - This can be the historic masonry contractor, not necessarily a third-party inspection agency.

1. Please provide any hauling/load restrictions that are discussed in 01 50 00, 3.6.E. Drawing G2.0 has a note that Harper’s Ferry Road may have a 15-ton loading limit that needs to be confirmed. It is unclear what this note exactly means and if it applies. Please confirm we are to assume that we can bring industry standard size heavy equipment, dump trucks, and concrete trucks in via Harpers Ferry Road.

5. Contractor is responsible to confirm any load limits for Harpers Ferry Road with applicable agency’s (Washington County, MD). See Section 01 50 00 – Paragraph 3.6.B.E. The note was meant to convey that the NPS access road and towpath has a general load limit of 15-ton GVW.

1. At the pre-bid meeting it was discussed that geotechnical investigations were performed. Can you please provide the geotechnical report?

6. Geotechnical Report is Attached.

1. Please confirm we are to assume the excavated soils and any water are not contaminated or hazardous. In the event the soil testing described in 1.5.E.3 in specification 31 20 00 shows the soils (or any water) are contaminated/hazardous, please confirm it would be handled via a contract modification.

7. Unknown at this time, see attached Geotechnical Report.

1. Please confirm we are not to excavate rock. Specification 31 20 00, 3.5.A discusses rock excavation.

8. Sheet S4.1 – Detail 2 shows chipping of existing bedrock to provide bearing for new structural elements. As described in Sheets S4. #, Loose material is required to be cleaned from rock surfaces. Generally, competent bedrock is intended to remain in place.

1. Specification 31 23 19 Dewatering talks about drawing the water level down to 2’ below the bottom of excavation with a dewatering system. The drawings show us excavating to bedrock. Please confirm collecting and removing water from the top of bedrock is acceptable.

9. Confirmed.

1. Specification 31 50 00 for Excavation Support and Protection does not seem to align with what we are seeing depicted on the drawings. Please clarify the following items:

10. Section 3.2, 3.3 and 3.6 sounds as if the intent is to install sheet pile cofferdams with bracing. Sheets C1.0 and C4.0 show small earthen sandbag cofferdams. Please confirm we are to follow the drawings and the intent is not to install sheet pile cofferdams.

0. The intent of this section of the specifications is for any contractor developed support of excavation. Cofferdams can be created as shown in plans or an alternate method upon contractor request and approval by MDE and the CO.

10. Section 3.5.A states to “install steel soldier piles before starting excavation.” We do not see any solider pile and lagging wall shown on the plans. Drawing S1.2 and S4.4 indicate a 1:1.5 layback slope for excavations. Please clarify.

1. The intent of this section of the specifications is for any contractor developed support of excavation. This is in the event the chosen contractor has means and methods that they prefer to use that implement support of excavation needing these types of materials.

1. Please confirm there is no reinforcing steel in the mass concrete fill (less any of the rock anchors shown) and that it is a 2200 PSI mix.

11. See contract plans and specifications for required structural parameters. The structural design, as shown in the contract documents has been confirmed to be shown as intended.

1. Please clarify any stream restrictions to the C&O canal which are generally listed on C5.3 note #9. If cofferdams are installed outside of any restriction, please confirm we can operate equipment and work within the cofferdam during any stream restriction.

12. NPS confirmed with MDE via email that the canal is considered to be a Use – I P waterway. In-stream work shall not be conducted during the period March 1 through June 15, inclusive, during any year. Based on previous experience with MDE, work within established cofferdams can remain ongoing so long as the perimeter controls are established prior to the start of the in-stream water restriction window.

1. Please provide any contact information for Potomac Edison personnel who have been involved during the design phase.

13. Per Section 011100 Paragraph 1.11 - Contractor is responsible for coordination with local entities for utilities. NPS does not have any contact information to provide at this time.

1. Drawing G1.0 and G1.1 note 11 discusses Washington County permits for any crane operations. Can you please provide what this permit application looks like or any restrictions?

14. Per Section 011100 Paragraph 1.11 – Contractor is responsible for coordination with Washington County. Contact information for Washington County Department of Public Works is included in the specifications.

1. Please confirm a separate schedule of values is not required with the proposal.

15. Contract Line Items (CLINs) are defined in Section 01 27 00. See Section B of the Solicitation for the Bid Schedule.

1. The documents call for any left-over stone to be delivered to a NPS facility. Please confirm this location is 18027 Pleasantville Road, Knoxville, MD per Drawing S4.4.

16. The address is confirmed – it is a NPS maintenance facility. 18027 Pleasantville Rd, Knoxville, MD 21758.

1. Can salvaged stone be stored at Canal Prism within jobsite limits?

17. Yes, NPS confirmed with MDE Waterways and Erosion Sediment Control/Stormwater reviewers that the canal prism can be used to temporarily store salvaged stone. Temporary stockpiling still needs to meet best management practices for erosion & sediment control (ex. MDE Erosion & Sediment Control Standard B-4-8).

1. Please confirm no new stone is needed for this project.

18. Confirmed.

1. Please confirm stone is to be re-installed in a similar pattern as existing and not each piece going back at exact location as existing.

19. Section 040307 – Paragraph 1.04 – mockups (and corresponding walls they represent) are required to have a similar appearance and coursing to the existing adjacent stone walls. It is not intended to place every individual stone back into the wall at its exact location to match existing.

1. Please confirm that stone repairs to be priced under CLIN 01 are limited to repairs as shown on S6.0. 1 Location. If not, please identify other repairs needed.

20. As indicated in Section 012700, CLIN 01 shall include all work not included in Contract Line Items 2,3,4, and 5. It is the intent to pay any stone infill and repair costs associated with the work shown on Sheet S6.0 under CLIN 01 (Lump Sum).

1. Drawing G1.0 shows construction equipment flow through Canal Towpath. Are there any time restrictions for the use of the tow path?

21. Section 015000 – On-site work shall be generally performed during normal business working hours of 7AM to 4PM, Monday through Friday, except when otherwise noted. There are no specific time restrictions on the towpath other than the on-site work hours described in the specifications. All work must be performed during daylight hours. NPS is agreeable to modifying this to 6:00AM to 5:00PM to be further discussed with the successful offeror.

1. Please confirm that cofferdam experience is required for past performance.

22. This has been revised to as follows. “The offeror may coordinate completion of the form entitled "Past Performance Questionnaire" in the Attachment 11 - Proposal Submission Package for construction projects of the same scope and complexity as the contemplated contract which required work with historic masonry, heavy civil features (ex. Excavation, concrete, roadwork. Etc.), and work in proximity to water.”

1. If cofferdam experience is required for this bid, does that has to be GC’s experience? Or is a subcontractor’s experience acceptable?

23. This has been revised to as follows. “The offeror may coordinate completion of the form entitled "Past Performance Questionnaire" in the Attachment 11 - Proposal Submission Package for construction projects of the same scope and complexity as the contemplated contract which required work with historic masonry, heavy civil features (ex. Excavation, concrete, roadwork. Etc.), and work in proximity to water.” Subcontractor’s experience may be taken into account during proposal evaluation in lieu of prime contractor.

1. Due to the winter weather conditions at the park, will NPS consider push the job starting date to next year and/ or extend the period of performance.

24. NPS’s perspective is that the Period of Performance already included reasonable allowances for winter weather conditions.