Att_07_140P8419Q0055_Site_Visit_Notes-Q-A.pdf

SOLICITATION NO. 140P8419Q0055

PAVE HIGH BLUFF ROAD, REDWOOD NATIONAL AND STATE PARKS,

DEL NORTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

SITE VISIT – JUNE 26, 2019

SITE VISIT SUMMARY SUMMARY:

A site visit was conducted on Wednesday, June 26, 2019 at 12 Noon Pacific Daylight Time.

Participants met at the end of High Bluff Road to view the site of work.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RECEIVED TO DATE:

Q1: The specs are calling for a 2 part epoxy paint material for the fog line. Would you consider changing the material to a thermoplastic or other non-epoxy based paints? The reason why i am mentioning this is that the 2 part epoxy paint requires a specialty piece of equipment that only one company here in California has to our knowledge, with that said the cost for placing this material will be substantially more than a Thermoplastic or other non-epoxy based paints.

A1: Thermoplastic will be an acceptable alternative.

Q2: Confirming a bid bond is not required?

A2: Correct. A bid bond is not required.

Q3: Payment for both Bid Item #1, Roadway Surfacing, and Bid Item #2, Shoulder Backing both are described as per lineal foot per Section 01 27 00 Definition of Bid Items. Under Section 02 74 30, Part 4 states the same. The Contract Bid Schedule and the solicitation for this project requests the bid amount for both these items is to be lump sum. Are we following the bid schedule? Asphalt and shoulder backing are typically paid for by the ton. If the bid schedule is lump sum, how is contractor bidding fairness to be maintained, and the NPS, protected from bidders underestimating the quantity of asphalt to be laid down? Asphalt is not concrete to be laid down between forms of a certain width and depth. Bidding asphalt on a linear foot basis does not solve the problem. If the NPS provides a design quantity of 540 tons, then that can be used as the budget. Any excess material can be placed to the benefit of the NPS.

A3: The Bid Schedule has been corrected to show estimated quantities per lineal feet (LF) vs lump sum (LS). See attached document: Att 01_140P8419Q0055_Contract Bid Schedule_revised.pdf.

Due to this change, the following clause is incorporated by reference into Solicitation/Contract Section I: FAR clause 52.211-18, Variation in Estimated Quantity (Apr 1984). The full text of the clause may be accessed electronically at this address: https://www.acquisition.gov

Q4: Was there a change in the specification of the fog line striping from 2-part epoxy to Thermoplastic?

A4: See A1 – yes, thermoplastic will be an acceptable alternative.

Q5: Is the following FAR section required for a contract of this size? Are we required to purchase a Payment bond?

I.10 – FAR 52.228-13 – Alternative Payment Protections (Jul 2000)

(a) The Contractor shall submit one of the following payment protections:

(i) A payment bond.

(ii) An irrevocable letter of credit (ILC).

(b) The amount of the payment protection shall be 100 percent of the contract price.

(c) The submission of the payment protection is required within 10 days of contract award.

A5: Yes, but this is a post-award submittal and not required to be submitted with your quote.

Within 10 days of award, the successful contractor shall be required to submit either a payment bond or an irrevocable letter of credit (ILC).

Q6: The bid item description for Road Surfacing states the price includes testing? “and testing of bituminous pavement.” The Specifications state that the “Field sampling and density determinations will be made by the Contracting Officer.” If the NPS is providing the compaction testing, and the AC supplier provides certification they are complying with their approved mix design, what testing are we performing?

A6: The successful contractor is required to provide asphalt mix that meets our specifications and shall perform in accordance with the specifications.

--END OF NOTES--