Att 11_140P8419R0013_Site Visit Notes-Q-A.pdf

SOLICITATION NO. 140P8419R0013

REPAIR RAW WATER SUPPLY AND INTAKE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR

THE PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM,

OREGON CAVES NATIONAL MONUMENT AND PRESERVE,

JOSEPHINE COUNTY, OREGON

SITE VISIT – NOVEMBER 20, 2019

SITE VISIT SUMMARY SUMMARY:

A site visit was conducted on Wednesday, November 20, 2019 at 9:00am Pacific Time.

Participants met at the Oregon Caves NM&P Headquarters building for a brief project overview. After the conclusion of the meeting, participants were shown the site.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS FROM VISIT AND RECEIVED THROUGH 12/3/2019:

Question1:

Will the due date for proposals be extended?

NPS Response:

Yes, the due date for proposals is extended through 3:00pm Pacific Time on Thursday, December 19, 2019.

Question 2:

I am trying to find out information about the listed solicitation 140P8419R0013 I have been able to download the plans from the old FBO site, but cannot find any information on the new SAM site about it, we want to confirm that the bid docs from the FBO site are the most current ones, the new SAM site does not list the bid docs.

NPS Response:

The Solicitation originally posted to Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) at www.fbo.gov. Effective November 12, 2019, FBO.gov is retired, and has been officially replaced with beta.sam.gov. Future Amendments to the Solicitation made by the CO will post to beta.sam.gov. Search under Contract Opportunities using Keyword 140P8419R0013 and the listed opportunity should come right up on the webpage.

Question 3:

We are have issues getting responses back from agency for references due to the holidays. In addition we have not seen any addendum's which I’m sure we can expect which will also give us time to react and plan for the addendum's. Can we extend the bid date a full 7 calendar days minimum if not more?

NPS Response: Yes, the due date has been extended through 3:00pm Pacific Time on Thursday, December 19, 2019. Note that Amendment 0001 was posted to provide information to interested parties before the Thanksgiving weekend; however technical issues were encountered which prevented the successful transmittal of Amendment 0001 to beta.sam.gov. The issues were eventually resolved, but the Amendment 0001

RFP No. 140P8419R0013, Attachment No. 11, Site Visit Notes-Q-A eventually transmitted to beta.sam.gov with no attachments. Hence, Amendment 0002 contains all of the attachments that should have been included in Amendment 0001.

Question 4:

How many days before the proposal due date can we submit questions?

NPS Response:

Per the Solicitation (see Section L), questions must be received in writing by the Contracting Officer no later than five (5) calendar days prior to proposal due date shown in the latest amendment.

Question 5:

Can we submit a final CPARS report in place of the Past Performance Questionnaire form attached to the Solicitation?

NPS Response:

Yes, relevant final completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reports are acceptable in lieu of having a reference complete the Past Performance Questionnaire form provided by the Solicitation.

Question 6:

I read that the bid guarantee is 20% of bid. Is that the same of bid bonds?

NPS Response:

An offer guarantee (bid bond) of 20 percent of the total offer amount is required to be submitted with your proposal package.

Question 7:

Do Bid Bonds need to be submitted hard copy?

NPS Response:

The Bid Bond must be submitted electronically via email to the Contracting Officer as part of your proposal package on or before the closing date of the Solicitation. The hard copy Bid Bond may follow via regular mail.

Question 8:

Please consider waiving the requirement to be a licensed contractor in the State of Oregon and allow our firm to contract with you on the Oregon Caves National Monument project?

NPS Response: Federal and State (including local) governments have varying authority to exercise government power and authority over such lands, depending upon the type of interests the Federal government obtained when acquiring the property and what authority a State has chosen to retain. This authority, right or power of a government to act is referred to generally as legislative jurisdiction.

In areas of “concurrent” jurisdiction, which applies to the location of this upcoming construction project at Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve, the State of Oregon has reserved the right to exercise, concurrently with the United States, all of the same governmental authority. As a result, State and local laws are applicable at the same time Federal law pertaining to the area also applies.

We have evaluated the effect of State issuance of a contractor’s license on any resultant Contract award and have concluded it will not unreasonably interfere with Federal functions, and is beneficial to the Government in providing a verifiable and consistent level of technical certification by the State for this specific trade. Therefore, we drafted our Solicitation to expressly include the requirement for the necessary state license.

Question 9:

It was noted on page 56 of the solicitation that a California Contractor’s License is required for this project from both the Prime and any Subcontractor’s. On page 63 of the solicitation it is noted that an Oregon Contractor’s License is required for this project from both the Prime and any Subcontractor’s. It appears that the California license was a typo as this project is located in Oregon. Please confirm that only the valid Oregon Contractor’s license and not the California Contractors license is required from both the Prime Contractor and any Subcontractors.

NPS Response: The reference to a California license is a typographical error. Only an Oregon license is needed.

Question 10:

IS THIS A BUY AMERICAN ONLY PROJECT – SUPPLIES/MATERIALS?

NPS Response: Yes, see Section I.12 of Solicitation which references FAR clause 52.225-9 – Buy American–Construction Materials (May 2014) and Section L.6 of Solicitation which references FAR provision 52.225-10 – Notice of Buy American Requirement--Construction Materials (May 2014).

Question 11:

Is there a photographic survey or video survey of existing conditions of the waterline route? Is there currently a 6ft path through the forest that the existing line rests within or does the 6ft swath need to be constructed from scratch? Just trying to figure out how many trees, roots and boulders will have to be removed.

NPS Response:

Interested parties are advised to go to the site visit. There is a trail, but considerable clearing and removing boulders will be needed. Site photos are provided (see attachment Att 12_140P8419R0013_Site Photos.pdf).

Question 12: Is there a geo-technical report available for this project?

NPS Response: No, there is not. There is a geotechnical report from a nearby road, parking lot, and retaining wall project. This is provided to allow interested parties to see the subsurface rock types, but otherwise is not very helpful (see attachment Att 13_ 140P8419R0013_ORCA_150_D34.pdf).

Question 13:

Will Chlorination and Testing be required during project?

NPS Response: Testing the waterline is required in accordance with the specifications;

however, since the waterline is non-potable, chlorination and bacT testing is not necessary. The contractor will still use all NSF 61 approved materials and chemicals during construction in accordance with the specifications.

Question 14:

Will surveying be required and who will responsible for it?

NPS Response: Contractor is responsible for ensuring that all work is adequately completed in accordance with the plans. Any necessary surveying work is the responsibility of the contractor to coordinate.

Question 15:

Does the project have Title III Engineering support?

NPS Response: If project management and technical assistance during construction is needed, NPS may pursue these services through an A/E firm, but currently there is no plan to contract these services.

Question 16:

I see that there are 2 intake screens on the bid schedule, and I see the indication of the screens in the spec under 01 27 00 3.1.I. and 33 12 16 2.8, but really no detail that I can find on the actual screens. Can you help me to locate the actual specification or design requirements for the intake screens?

NPS Response:

The screens will be static bar racks or perforated pipe screens made from anti-corrosive material that adequately fit the manifold and effluent pipe. The current screens at the water intake are made from PVC with 3/4" holes drilled into the side, 1/4" wire mesh around the pipe. New intake screens should be comparable to current intake screens.

Question 17:

Sheet C07 calls out new intake screens and manifold. There is not detail for this. Can you provide a detail and more description for this portion of the work?

NPS Response: See response to Question 16 above.

Question 18:

WHAT IS THE GUAGE AND COLOR OF TRACER WIRE ABOVE POLY LINE?

NPS Response: 12 AWG. Although the water is non-potable, please still use blue line.

Question 19:

Is least disturbance priority or is a 6’ wide path priority? If Contractor can have less than 6’ wide disturbance, is that preferred?

NPS Response: A 6-foot path is not a park priority. Least amount of disturbance is the park priority. The entire waterline trail is eligible for listing in the National Historic Register. SHPO concurred on the Archeology report that stated that the rehabilitation of the waterline trail will retain the look and feel of a historic landscape. The park plans to use a trail carrier to carry materials along this trail. A 40” wide trail is a sufficient width. A contractor that will use smaller equipment and/or restore the area to a smaller width is preferred.

However, during the course of construction, the contractor may disturb up to 10’ off pipe centerline in either direction in order to facilitate movement of equipment and materials needed to install the waterline. As stated in the contract, all but the 40” path must be returned to a condition similar to the original landscape prior to construction.

Question 20:

The drawings indicate that we are to provide a 6 ft maintenance path along the new waterline. During the site visit it was discovered that there were many areas where the 6ft pathway would be unobtainable. Please advise how the government would like to handle these areas.

NPS Response: Provide a path not to exceed 40”. See answer to Question 19 above.

Question 21:

How much tree removal? Sizes over 10’ and under 10’?

NPS Response: In the 20’ corridor (10’ in both directions off pipe centerline) there are the following trees:

1 large snag 4 large old-growth trees 372 trees <8” DBH are estimated to need removal for the project

With the goal to limit disturbance to a 40” path, the number of trees is obviously significantly lower.

Question 22:

It was stated during the job walk that we are not allowed to remove any vegetation or trees from the park. We are to scatter the brush and trees on site. Is this the case?

NPS Response: Trees and vegetation can be scattered. Trees smaller than 8” in diameter can be mulched.

Question 23:

Removal of dead standing trees?

NPS Response: The contractor shall fell any hazardous trees or trees that are in the way of the 40” path the waterline follows. Any tree larger than 8” in diameter must be left on site but kept off the path. Any tree smaller than 8” can be left onsite or mulched to provide final cover after completion of the project.

Question 24:

What is the maximum size of tree that the contractor can remove from the site if it interferes with the new waterline?

NPS Response: See answer to Question 23 above.

Question 25:

There were a few areas that the waterline ran through what appeared to be bedrock.

How will rock excavation like this be handled? Would the government consider putting in an rock excavation allowance?

NPS Response: NPS assumes up to 50 CY of bedrock (defined as earth in which a

12,000 lb excavator cannot remove the material) will needed to be excavated for this project.

For the solicitation, contractors should include in their proposal the cost (equipment and labor) to extract 50 CY of rock. If during the project, excavation greater than 50 CY is needed, then the contractor can submit a request for equitable adjustment using the procedures outlined under the differing site conditions clause.

Question 26:

There is no bid item for rock excavation. Can you provide a 10cuyd rock excavation bid item that can be used if rock is encountered.

NPS Response: See answer to Question 25 above regarding 50 CY of rock excavation.

Question 27:

Back fill with native? Bedding?

NPS Response: See Section 31 05 16 of specifications regarding bedding and fill material. Backfill with native material is authorized except for where the plans and specifications forbid it due to soil conditions. Bedding with native material is authorized if able to sieve the material to a grade and size identified in the specifications.

Question 28:

Pipe bedding in details Pg.Co8 “A” shows Pipe Bedding as Native except where COR Directs but specs show Trench Bank Run style pipe bedding. Is there testing required?

NPS Response: Contractor should determine if native material does not meet backfill standards in that it is “free from various types of wood waste or other extraneous or objectionable materials. It shall have such characteristics of size and shape that it will compact readily, and the maximum particle size shall not exceed ⅔ of the depth of the layer being placed.” Contractor will conduct a sieve analysis in accordance with ASTM C136 of native material for every 10 cy of backfill as well as conduct visual analysis of the native material to ensure it is suitable backfill material as per the specifications.

Question 29:

Reference Drawing Sheet No. C 08, Detail Number A, Specification Number 31 05 16

2.2 B , Subject: Native Trench Backfill. Under section 31 05 16 2.2 B “Bank Run Gravel for Trench Backfill” requires a gradation and sand equivalent however; on the drawings sheet C08 detail A ( note 2 ) it states that trench backfill can be native material except as directed by the COR. Is native material allowed for trench backfill and if so; does it need to meet a gradation and sand equivalent?

NPS Response: The intent is to use native material for nearly all backfill except where the backfill is not suitable (such as pulverized bedrock or use of organic material such as wood chips, etc.). The contractor should sort/sieve onsite to test the material before backfill.

Question 30:

Sheet C08, Detail A shows a pipe bedding zone. It looks like this zone can be native material if acceptable otherwise bank run gravel from on site can be used. Is this the case? Please clarify. Or can we screen material from onsite? After visiting the site we dont believe importing material is an option.

NPS Response: The contractor can screen the material onsite. However, importing fill material may still be needed if backfill does not meet specifications after screening.

Question 31:

On Drawing/Sheet No G02, a note titled, “ SEE NOTE 1” is shown in three ( 3 ) places however; note 1 does not exist. Please provide a construction note 1.

NPS Response: The note is to reference: “Creeks, and streams shown, all have several boulders within 10 feet of waterline on both sides.” This is so contractors are aware of the large obstacles in and near the creek beds. Also, the contractors should ensure that they comply with proper sediment capture to not impact streams as stipulated by the Army Corps of Engineers permit.

Question 32:

We want to know if we can use a Bypass lines (Lay Flat Hose ) in sections to provide water for the facility during excavation and path creation?

NPS Response: The contractor can and should install a bypass line. The contractor will be required to provide a submittal post-award of how they will prevent sediments from construction and air from entering the bypass and waterline so as not to damage the waterline or water treatment equipment.

Question 33:

Is Panther Creek Flow line able to sustain the water supply while the work is in progress?

NPS Response: No. Panther Creek flow during summer months is variable and not likely to provide enough water for public use and fire protection emergency.

Question 34:

During the site visit there were numerous areas that have conflicts of where the new waterline is supposed to run such as trees in the way, running through bedrock, etc. Is it possible to relocate the waterline in areas such as these? Also, there are many existing logs/brush/trees near the new waterline. What is the requirement for site restoration in these areas?

NPS Response: Currently environmental compliance is approved based on the design in the construction documents. Proposals should be based on the current route for the pipe. Post-award value engineering change proposals that propose changes in the depth and route of the pipe will be considered, but not necessarily approved, pending a technical evaluation and environmental compliance determination.

Question 35:

After the job walk this project is really not possible as designed due to the sensitive habitat and large trees. We have worked with HDPE in sensitive habitat areas many times previously. Our company has many other value engineering ideas that would save money and set us apart from the rest of the contractors. Can we turn in alternate value engineered proposals with the original proposal? when turning in proposals can we turn in multiple pages with descriptions and narratives?

NPS Response: Contractor is authorized to field fit the waterline. The Contractor should avoid making excessive turns to avoid every obstacle. If deviated in trench depth causing local high points, the contractor will install necessary air release valves to prevent air bubbles building up in the lines. Also see answer to Question 34 above.

Question 36:

WHY IS GOVT REQUIRING A FLANGED GATE VALVE WHEN A 4” POLY BALL

VALVE CAN BE FUSED TO PIPE AND IS VIRTUALLY MAINTENANCE FREE,

QUARTER TURN OPEN AND CLOSE AND REMOVES THE POSSIBILITY OF LEAKS

THRU GASKETS AND BOLTS ON GATE VALVE?

NPS Response: The design was developed by licensed engineer and approved by a licensed engineer with the Department of Environmental Quality. Provide proposals based on this design. After award, the contractor can submit valued engineering proposals stamped by a licensed engineer.

Question 37:

During the site visit it was noted that Value Engineering proposals would be accepted in addition to the specified bid proposal package. Please confirm this is correct.

NPS Response: No, alternate proposals will not be considered. Contractors should provide technical and cost proposals based on the scope of work in the solicitation.

There is an opportunity to submit a value engineering proposal after contract award, in accordance with FAR clause 52.248-3 Alt I, Value Engineering – Construction Alternate I.

Question 38:

WILL GOVT PAY FOR MATERIALS STORED ON SITE?

NPS Response: Material and equipment may be stored on site as space allows as authorized by the Contracting Officer. In accordance with the FAR clause 52.232-5 Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (May 2014), in the preparation of estimates, the Contracting Officer may authorize material delivered on the site and preparatory work done to be taken into consideration.

Question 39:

The period of performance on the SF1442 states that it is between 03/02/20 and 06/30/20. There is a possibility that the site may not be accessible due to snow during the stated period of performance. If the site is inaccessible as a result of snow, would the government be willing to push the period of performance to a later date until the site was accessible?

NPS Response: Yes. The site is assumed to be covered in snow in March and early April. During this time, the contractor will complete submittals and other pre-site work prep. Dates can be adjusted if conditions are not favorable until later in the spring.

Question 40:

Can the start date be later if heavy spring or winter snows prevent access?

NPS Response: See Question 39 above regarding project performance periods.

Question 41:

IS THERE A WINTER EXCLUSION RELATED TO THIS PROJECT?

NPS Response: See Question 39 above regarding extension of performance period.

Question 42:

WHEN DOES GOVT EXPECT TO AWARD PROJECT?

NPS Response: Award is anticipated in mid-late January 2020

--END OF NOTES--