140R4022B0001_NGWSP_Blk_4a___4b_Q_A___1_0003.pdf

Solicitation No. 140R4022B0001 Project: NGWSP Block 4a & 4b

Clarification and Questions # 1

1. Regarding key personnel qualifications, the specifications state the Project Manager and Site Superintendent shall have had a comparable role on three projects of similar nature, size, complexity. Please provide further definition on similar nature, size, complexity.

Also, do the three projects for each individual need to have been performed by the same contractor?

Reclamation Response:

a. Similar nature, size, and complexity would include a 36-inch or larger buried water transmission pipe of similar pipe material, at least 10 miles, with similar complexity to the principal components of work as identified in Specifications Section 01 11 00, Summary of Work, paragraph 1.02 (for example, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), pipeline and valve installation).

b. The three projects for each individual do not need to have been performed by the same contractor.

2. Per the specifications, the Quality Control Supervisor (QCS) must be a graduate engineer, graduate architect, or graduate of construction management, with minimum 4-years’ construction experience in charge of quality control for projects similar in nature to that required by this contract, or a construction person with 10-years in related QC work.

Please provide further definition on similar in nature to that required by this contract.

Reclamation Response:

See response above. Similar in nature means similar components of work as identified in Specifications Section 01 11 00, Summary of Work, paragraph 1.02.

3. Do any of the Key Personnel roles identified in the specifications need to be filled/assigned to employees of the Prime Contractor?

Reclamation Response:

Key personnel identified in Specifications Section 01 31 19, Project Management and Coordination, paragraph 1.03 D, 1, need to be filled/assigned to employees of the Prime Contractor.

Note: the Contractor’s Onsite Safety Representative must be on site at all times, and have no other duties, in accordance with Specifications Section 01 35 30, Contractor’s Onsite Safety Personnel.

4. Please clarify quantities. I have a discrepancy of quantity after completing my pipe take off.

-42” Plan quantity block-B - 56,220 LF (CLIN 23) -42” Takeoff Quantity block-B - 57,306 LF

The total length of Reach 4B line pipe is CLIN 23 + CLIN 20 + CLIN 21 (57,330 LF), in accordance with the Measurement and Payment statements included in Specification Sections 33 11 10, Pipeline General Requirements, Section 33 05 21, Bored Road Crossing and Section 33 05 22, and Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), respectively.

5. Is the line drawing in the profile view of the plans showing Top of pipe, Centerline of pipe or Bottom of pipe?

Reclamation Response:

The pipeline elevation shown on the profile view of the drawings indicates the Centerline of Pipe, as identified in the symbols on Drawing 1695-D-61798.

6. Per the specifications, steel pipe appears to be the only material option for the HDD while the open cut has HDPE, Steel, Ductile Iron and PVC. Is this correct?

Reclamation Response:

Yes, this is correct. The only material option for the HDD is Steel as identified in Specifications Section 33 05 22, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), paragraph 2.04, A and B.

7. The cathodic test stations are approximately 1,200 ft spacing (Section 26 42 13 – 16), is there conduit running the entire length or just from the pipeline to the test station?

Reclamation Response:

No conduit is required for the cable from the pipeline to the test station.

Reclamation only recommends conduit in yards to make any cable replacement easier, however Reclamation will not dictate means and methods.

8. The plans and specs call out restrained joints at fittings and valves but does not appear to specify distance, please clarify.

Reclamation Response:

Per Note 10 on Drawings 1695-D-61821 and 1695-D-61822, miter bends may be restrained by concrete thrust blocks or restrained joint lengths given in the tables on the drawings. Tables include stations of fittings and valves, as needed.

9. For the steel pipe option, can you clarify the amount of nonwelded versus welded joints?

Reclamation Response:

Please see Specifications Section 33 11 12, Steel Line Pipe, paragraph 3.02 B for information on where welded joints are required. Please note the requirement for hydrostatic leak testing and zero leakage requirements per Specification Section 33 11 10, Pipeline General Requirements, paragraph 3.10, A, 8. Reclamation will not dictate means and methods for achieving zero leakage requirements as identified in the specifications, however the Contractor could choose to weld all joints.

10. On earlier phases of the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project, there were buried fiber optics, I do not see it on this project. Can you confirm?

Reclamation Response:

Buried fiber optic cables are currently not part of Block 4A-4B.

11. Drawings pages 54 and 55, say ‘For Information Only’. Please confirm that these takes and manifold piping are not included in this contract.

Reclamation Response:

‘For Information Only’ drawings provide information on work performed by others, not included in this contract.

12. There are bid items (CLIN 10 and 11) for Unwatering and Dewatering per section 31 03 33 of the specifications. They are the same thing. Can you clarify the difference?

Reclamation Response:

See Specification Section 31 03 33, Removal and Control of Water, paragraphs 1.03 A and 1.03 B for the definitions of unwatering and dewatering.

13. The drawing and price schedule shows a quantity of 740 LF for the 42” HDD (CLIN 21).

Given the product size, material, and HDD specifications, this is not an acceptable length.

This drill will have to be lengthen significantly, while also needing additional depth to create a constructible crossing that meets the requirements set forth in the bid documents.

Based on the document drawings, we believe a design length closer to 1200’-1300’ would conform to the extensive specifications provided. Contractor would suggest that the HDD be re-evaluated.

Per Specification Section 33 05 22, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD); the 42” HDD (CLIN 21) is measured as: “Horizontal length along pipe centerline, without allowance for slope, between ends of pipe in place.” It is the contractor’s responsibility to price the appropriate length of pipe for bid.

This design was developed in accordance with current standard industry documents and methods, including ASTM F1962 and ASCE Manual of Practice documents and Delft equation hydrofracture potential/cover requirements. Without seeing a proposed revised bore profile, with the associated bore geometry, Reclamation cannot concur that the current length and design are not acceptable and believes that the design ‘as issued’ is constructable.

14. If the HDD is not re-evaluated, without a change to the bid quantity, how would Contractor proposed revisions to the Plan and Profile be compensated? If the Plan and Profile are required to be extended, would the Contractor be able to bill the additional footage at the unit price?

Reclamation Response:

See response above. Measurement and payment of the HDD is based on “Horizontal length along pipe centerline, without allowance for slope, between ends of pipe in place.” If additional length is required, the Variation in Estimated Quantity (FAR 52.211-18) Clause will be utilized for the additional footage.

15. The HDD specifications state contractor shall follow ream step sizes that do not exceed 12-inches, in Spec Section 33 05 22 - 18. Can that be removed? as it is common practice, depending on the soil conditions, to ream in a much larger scale.

Reclamation Response:

Yes, see Amendment 003 for revised Specification Section 33 05 22, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), revising the ream step sizes.

Amendment 3 includes the following specifications sections that have been revised:

33 05 22 Horizontal Directional Drilling 33 11 12 Steel Line Pipe 33 11 18 HDPE Pressure Pipe