Amendment 03 Seattle PH1A Continuation Sheets 03.pdf

70Z05025R43000001

SOLICITATION NO. 70Z05025R43000001 IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:

Enclosed documents:

Boat Haul out – As Built Reference USCG Base Seattle IDP Flow Chart FPAS-SILC-NMACC III Electrical Equipment 2025_03_11_sign

Task Order Announcement

RFP, Drawings GC100

REMOVE:

General Note 1 on Drawing GC100

INSERT:

Not Used

(Sheet GC100)

RFP, Drawings CD109

REMOVE:

Scale at 1”=40’

INSERT:

Scale at 1”=20’

RFP, Drawings T-101

REMOVE:

Installation Notes #11

INSERT:

Not used

(Sheet T-101)

Specification Section 35 20 23 – Paragraph 3.4.1.e DELETE: The certified marine surveyor shall also document seaworthiness of each barge used for transport of dredge material and dredge debris from the site to the transload facility. Documentation of the seaworthiness of each transport barge shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer or their designated representative prior to that barge leaving the site.

INSERT: None

THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS WERE RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE

SOLICITATION:

PPI #6. Tentative award date for this project has been identified as August 2025. General Note 1 on Sheet GC100 indicates that Potential Laydown Area 1 will not be available after September 2025.

Has USCG made arrangements to extend the availability of this area into the future so that it can actually be used for its intended purpose? If the intent is to use Temporary Laydown Area 1 as a temporary storage location for dredge spoil pending offhaul and disposal, the Contractor will need use of this space until at least January 2028.

Answer: See drawing deletions section above, this note for laydown area 1 has been removed. Laydown area 1 will be available at the start of the project and will be available through the entire project. Coordination will be required with Base Seattle operations regarding the exact usage for the laydown areas.

PPI #7. Tentative award date for this project has been identified as August 2025. General Note 1 on Sheet GC100 indicates that Potential Laydown Area 1 will not be available after September 2025.

Has USCG made arrangements to extend the availability of this area into the future so that it can actually be used for its intended purpose? If the intent is to use Temporary Laydown Area 1 as a temporary storage location for dredge spoil pending offhaul and disposal, the Contractor will need use of this space until at least January 2028.

Answer: See answer to PPI #6

PPI #8. Tentative award date for this project has been identified as August 2025. General Note 1 on Sheet GC100 indicates that Potential Laydown Area 1 will not be available after September 2025.

If this is correct, is there an amended plan for the alignment of the vehicle barriers / temporary fence shown on GC100?

Answer: See answer to PPI #6, there is no amended plan for alignment of vehicle barriers/temp fence shown in GC100.

PPI #9. Please provide a detail showing how the ecoblocks and temp fence are to be arranged. Are the ecoblocks intended to be installed as a solid line with the temporary fence attached atop the ecoblocks? Are the ecoblocks and temporary fence intended to act independently? If so, can we core through the pavement to set fence posts?

Answer: Please see detail E4 on drawing sheet CP502 for details about ecoblock and temp fence installation. Ecoblocks and temporary fence are not intended to act independently, except for areas where vehicle and pedestrian gates are specified.

PPI #10. Detail B4 on Drawing GC500 shows a “Temporary Stormwater Re-route” and the detail is cross-referenced to Drawing GC120. Drawing GC120 has not been provided as of yet. Please advise.

Answer: This cross-reference is incorrect. The cross references for the details on this sheet will be updated as follows:

Detail E2, GC111-GC116 Detail E6, GC114 and GC116 Detail B4, GC111-GC114 These corrections will be made to the Issue for Construction Drawing set

PPI #11. SECTION 01 30 00 Page 1, 1.6 SUPERVISION, paragraph 1.6.4 Tribal Liaison states “The Contractor shall be responsible to pay for movement of any Tribal fishing nets needed to support construction activities and claims for any damaged nets resulting from the Contractor's vessel movements.” This impact is an unknown risk to all contractors. We respectfully request the bid form be modified to include a fixed monetary allowance for this activity to be equalized the values estimated by each of the bidders. As a basis of bid, it will be the Coast Guard choice to either create a lump sum value or unit price for the number of expected in the bid item. Post award the actual cost and number of encounters will be tracked and paid to the contractor via the owner’s bid item.

Answer: For bidding purposes, contractors are to expect $500 for each net movement. The contractor's means and methods for sediment disposal, vessel movements, and other Tribal impacting activities will determine the impact to the Tribes.

PPI #12. Please confirm the water quality criteria (i.e. turbidity limits) for both dredging and capping. Will any exceptions be given for capping with clean imported materials?

Answer: Water quality criteria are under review by the USEPA and the ACOE. Comments have been received and are under review; any requirements will be issued to bidders as they are understood and incorporated into the documents. It is not expected that there will be exceptions given for capping with clean imported material.

PPI #13. Please note that DUs do not appear to be shown on plans CN 101. Can these please be provided? Is there any flexibility in the size, shape, and number of DUs?

Answer: DUs are not shown on plans for clarity. DU outlines and confirmation sampling will be provided following approval by the USEPA; this is an ongoing effort and the information will be provided to bidders when available. Until all details are received from the USEPA, the bidders shall undertake confirmation sampling planning in accordance with the requirements of the Technical Specification Section 35 20 23.

PPI #14. How many dredge passes are anticipated in Dredge Area 2 to achieve acceptance? The concern being side slope sloughing requiring redredge.

Answer: The number of dredge passes required to achieve acceptance of Dredge Area 2 is the contractor’s responsibility to determine.

PPI #15. CN101 – Note 16: For Dredge Area 6, can an additional 20’ (or more) to the West of the key cut be performed to ease in it’s construction and minimize or eliminate materials sloughing into key cut?

Answer: Additional dredging to the west of the keyway will not be permitted.

PPI #16. CN102 – Note 12 – It this requirement for areas that have been dredged (i.e once dredged, shall be covered in that season) or does this apply for the entirety of the dredging / cover task (i.e. all dredging and cover completed in one season)?

Answer: This note applies to all dredging, cover placement, in-situ treatment, and revetment construction. These activities shall be completed in one in-water work window to the extent possible, however, it is possible that some or all of these activities will need to be completed in more than one in-water work window.

PPI #17. How does the government intend to survey / verify materials placed under the apron/east on the East Side of the slip?

Answer: The successful contractor shall conduct pre-construction and post-construction surveys with adequate accuracy to verify the quantity placed for the East Revetment (including the toe). Ground modeling software is recommended for the survey post-processing. Survey drawings are required to be provided to the Government for review and approval.

PPI #18. 01 11 00 – 1.5: Does the second paragraph apply to dredging/underwater work?

Answer: To the Coast Guard's best knowledge, there are no underwater utilities in Slip 36.

This paragraph is intended for all shoreside utility locates and does not apply to underwater work.

PPI #19. 35 20 23 – 1.3.2: Does the contractor have to finish DU by DU or can multiple DUs be undertaken at a time to avoid dredging cover materials when starting the adjacent DU? Can a buffer between active dredging and capping be maintained to minimize cross contamination?

Answer: The limits of the DUs have been established based on anticipated dredging/cover/capping conditions. There is no restriction for completing sampling prior to placement of cover/capping material except as otherwise stated in the specifications.

Maintaining a buffer between active dredging and capping is acceptable to minimize cross contamination as long as other requirements of the specifications are met.

PPI #20. 35 20 23 – 1.3.4: What is envisioned for confirmation samples (E.g. 3” vibracore, ponar, etc)? What if samples cannot be obtained to the required 4’ with that equipment?

Answer: It is the contractor’s responsibility to select means and methods to obtain samples to the specified depths in Section 1.3.4 Table 2.

PPI #21. 35 20 23 – 1.8: Is the government expecting that the quantity and dispersion of ferrous debris may render magnetometer survey challenging / produce inaccurate results? Is the side scan / magnetometer survey required to be performed by a third party or can the contractor utilize in-house Certified Hydrographic Surveyor?

Answer: The Government does not expect any quantity or dispersion of ferrous debris to render the survey challenging. As long as the Hydrographic Surveyor meets the requirements outlined in 35 20 23 – 1.8, they are authorized to perform these duties.

PPI #22. 35 20 23 – 3.3.1: Government determines the order of work -What is this order of work applicable to or referring to? It seems that this varies from the general order of work spelled out in the rest of the plans.

Answer: Sequencing for the project is detailed in the bid documents (Contract Documents, Plans, and Specifications). The Government does not intend to change the specified order of work. If operations necessitate a change in order of work, the Government would coordinate with the contractor and determine if a contract modification is required.

PPI #23. 35 20 23 – 3.3.7.1: Does the overdepth apply to all side slopes?

Answer: Overdredge does not apply to side slopes.

PPI #24. 35 20 23 – 3.3.9: As the contractor is ultimately responsible for eliminating spillage as a permit requirement, can the requirement for 2-ft below the containment height of the barge be eliminated to allow greater flexibility in barge configuration?

Answer: No, the 2-ft below the containment height of the barge requirement will not be eliminated.

PPI #25. 35 20 23 – 3.3.14: Can the WQMP mentioned in 01 57 19 be provided?

Answer: The Preliminary Water Quality Monitoring Plan Framework was included in the specifications attachments sent in Amendment 01 on 05Mar25 included as an attachment to the solicitation package.

PPI #26. 35 20 23 - 3.4.1.e: Please consider removing the need for a “certified marine surveyor” to perform daily barge inspections. This duty is better served by a qualified person or engineer with dredging experience provided by the contractor.

Answer: This requirement is removed see specification changes above.

PPI #27. 35 31 19 – 3.5.1 Table 6: Is the carbon in place concentration percentage by weight or by volume?

Answer: Carbon content is by weight.

PPI #28. 35 31 19 – 3.5.2: How is the “vertical distribution” of the carbon going to be determined?

Answer: Vertical distribution will be based on visual observation; carbon content will be determined in the laboratory.

PPI #29. Plan Sheet SD-110(Sheet 45 of 341) General Note # 2 states that references drawings for additional information regarding existing improvements to be removed but does not indicate location of drawings. Please provide location for reference drawings or provide these additional drawings if not included.

Answer: See provided Reference drawings for boat haul out. The majority of the current timber fender system is missing or damaged.

PPI #30. Plan Sheet B-100 General notes # 3 references previous historical borings were performed by others but not included in the documents. Please provide the additional borings logs from 2010, 2019 and 2022 for additional reference as only 5 boring logs have been included.

Answer: The boring logs requested are included in the USCG Base Seattle Slip 36 Geotechnical Data Report which is included as an attachment to the specifications provided in Amendment 01 on 05Mar25

PPI #32. Section 01 57 19 Temporary Environmental Controls Part 1.3.1 states “The USCG/Muckleshoot Tribal MOA and the USCG/Suquamish Tribal MOA are provided as attachments to the solicitation package (currently in development - will be issued via addendum)”. What is the government’s timeline for distribution of the addendum that will include the two Tribal MOA’s.

Answer: The Coast Guard is still working with the tribes on finalizing the MOA's. The current specifications outline the major requirements necessary to bid the project. If MOAs are finalized post award, the Government will determine if a contract modification is required.

PPI #34. Section 01 57 19 Temporary Environmental Controls Part 1.4.3.3 states “List of Draft Environmental Plans to be Finalized and Submitted by the Contractor. Draft Environmental Plans as noted below are provided as attachments to the solicitation. a. Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). A preliminary QAPP is provided as an attachment to the solicitation package. The Contractor will finalize the QAPP following issuance of the Slip 36 ASAOC. b. Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP), detailed draft framework is provided as an attachment to the solicitation package. The Contractor will finalize the WQMP following issuance of the ASAOC. c. Other plans not named pending EPA review and approval of the 100% Phase 1A Design and designation thereof (if required, these plans will be issued via addenda)”. What is the government’s timeline for distribution of the addendum that will include the QAPP, ASAOC, and WQMP?

Answer: QAPP, ASAOC, and WQMP were provided as specification attachments in Amendment 01 on 05Mar2025

PPI #35. Section 01 57 19 Temporary Environmental Controls Part 3.2.1 Cultural, Archaeological, and Historical Resource Protection states “The Government retains ownership and control over historical and archaeological resources.” Will the government lead the state and tribal historical project planning consultation and when will the government provide conditions related to cultural and historical resources?

Answer: The Government will lead the state and tribal historical project planning consultations. No tribal monitors are required for this project, however the contractor shall follow the attached “USCG Base Seattle IDP Flow Chart” for inadvertent discoveries.

PPI #36. Please provide an additional site walk for Demolition subcontractors to review the existing site conditions.

Answer: The Coast Guard will not accommodate a second site walk.

PPI #37. Section 1.8.4 of Specification 35 51 13.00 20 requires a 10-year warranty by the Contractor on the pontoon modules. Please confirm this warranty is to be provided by the installing subcontractor or manufacturer of the floating docks and not the prime contractor.

Answer: A 10-year warranty must be provided by the manufacturer; however the Prime contractor is responsible for coordination and delivery of all specified warranties.

PPI #40. The Task Order Announcement for this project identifies “Wage Decision No.

WA20250125 dated February 7, 2025 (provided in electronic format via Sam.gov).” Upon inspection of the Wage Determination at SAM.gov, we found the Wage Decision referenced, but neither Modification 0 or Modification 1 versions are actually “dated February 7, 2025” per the TOA instruction. Both modifications were however “published” on 2/7/25; however, neither file is dated with 2/7/25. Additionally, at the bottom of the first page on Modification 1 it lists the WD Modification History and identifies a Modification 2 that was published on 03/07/2025.

Modification 2 is not available via SAM.gov, and coincidentally the “Publication Date” listed matches the actual date stamped at the top of Modification 1. It appears that a clerical error has occurred. Please clarify the Wage Determination to be used for this contract. In the response, please include the correct Modification Number and its corresponding date that are readily available from SAM.gov.

Answer: The Wage Determination listed in the TOA applies published/dated 2/7/25. If at the time of award, a more recent Wage Determination from Sam.gov is available, it will be included in the award.

PPI #42. With the current chaos surrounding tariffs, we are having a difficult time getting pricing from vendors. Most vendors are only willing to hold their pricing for 7 days. Given the length of time that it will take the Coast Guard to evaluate offers, we request that some sort of material price index language or similar protection be included in this contract. In the absence of some sort of material price protection, contractors will have no choice but to include a huge material price escalation factor in their bids. Please advise.

Answer: We recognize the existence of price instability, and we appreciate your request to insert specific language and terminology to define how material prices are adjusted based on market and economic prices/indices. Unfortunately, the ongoing instability surrounding tariffs does not impact this firm fixed price project, so we ask that Offerors’ initial proposals contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price (and technical standpoint).

PPI # 45. On GC100 note # 1 states Laydown Area 1 will not be available after September 2025.

In looking at the remaining sites, Laydowns #2 and #3 are extremely small for this project. Could you provide us with another location similar in size to Laydown #1?

Answer: See answer to PPI #6.

PPI # 48. Please confirm the drawing scale on CD109 at 1” =40’ and CD108 at 1” =20’.

Answer: The Scale bar on CD108 is correct, The scale bar on CD109 will be corrected to show 1"=20' in the Issue for Construction Drawings, see drawing updates above.

PPI #53. Is the chain link fence on concrete barrier shown on Drawings CP103 and CP104 considered to be temporary or permanent?

Answer: Fence on Drawings CP103 and CP104 are temporary however will be left in place at the end of this contract, see detail E4 on drawing sheet CP502 for details about ecoblock and temp fence installation.

PPI #54. Is the chain link fence with the eco blocks shown on Drawings CD106 to CD109 considered to be temporary or permanent. If this is temporary, where does the government furnished eco blocks get returned to?

Answer: The eco blocks and on drawings CD106 to CD109 are existing. At the completion of the project the contractor will place the blocks at a location TBD on terminal 46 near the project site.

PPI #56. Specification 28 31 76: Interior Fire Alarm and Mass Notification System, Addressable is included, but we cannot locate any drawings where this system is indicated. Please identify where this system is shown, provide additional plans, or indicate whether this system is intended to be bidder designed.

Answer: Fire Alarm and Mass Notification System is only required in the Floating Boathouse. Please see fire alarm plans for the Floating Boathouse Sheet AB003.

PPI #58. Sheet T–101 Installation Note 11 says the 25-pair cable should go from Bldg 1 to the new boathouse. All of the other 25 pair cables come from Bldg 4. See notes 5 and 7. Is Note 11 correct?

Answer: Note 11 under "Installation Notes" on Sheet T-101 is no longer applicable and has been removed in this amendment. The 25-pair does come from Building 4 only, not Building 1.

PPI #63. Are there any as-built drawings for Pier 36 B?

Answer: As built drawings of Pier 36B are incorporated into the demolition drawing section.

See sheets SD120, SD121, SD122, SD123, and SD124.

PPI #81. Please confirm the water quality criteria (i.e. turbidity limits) for both dredging and caping.

Will any exceptions be given for capping with clean imported materials?

Answer: See Answer to PPI #12

PPI #82. Is there any flexibility in the size, shape, and number of DUs?

Answer: See answer to PPI #13

PPI #83. How many dredge passes are anticipated in Dredge Area 2 to achieve acceptance? The concern being side slope sloughing requiring redredge.

Answer: See answer to PPI #14

PPI #84. On sheet CN101 – Note 16: For Dredge Area 6, can an additional 20’ (or more) to the West of the key cut be performed to ease in it’s construction and minimize or eliminate materials sloughing into key cut?

Answer: See answer to PPI #15

PPI #85. On sheet CN102 – Note 12: Is this requirement for areas that have been dredged (i.e once dredged, shall be covered in that season) or does this apply for the entirety of the dredging / cover task (i.e. all dredging and cover completed in one season)?

Answer: See answer to PPI #16

PPI #86. How does the government intend to survey / verify materials placed under the apron/east on the East Side of the slip?

Answer: See answer to PPI #17

PPI #87. In spec section 01 11 00 – 1.5, Does the second paragraph apply to dredging/underwater work?

Answer: See answer to PPI# 18

PPI #88. Does the contractor have to finish DU by DU or can multiple DUs be undertaken at a time to avoid dredging cover materials when starting the adjacent DU? Can a buffer between active dredging and capping be maintained to minimize cross contamination?

Answer: See answer to PPI#19

PPI #89. What is envisioned for confirmation samples (E.g. 3” vibracore, ponar, etc)? What if samples cannot be obtained to the required 4’ with that equipment?

Answer: See answer to PPI#20

PPI #90. Is the government expecting that the quantity and dispersion of ferrous debris may render magnetometer survey challenging / produce inaccurate results? Is the side scan / magnetometer survey required to be performed by a third party or can the contractor utilize in-house Certified Hydrographic Surveyor?

Answer: See answer to PPI#21

PPI #91. In spec section 35 20 23 – 3.3.1: Government determines the order of work -What is this order of work applicable to or referring to? It seems that this varies from the general order of work spelled out in the rest of the plans.

Answer: See answer to PPI#22

PPI #92. Does the over depth apply to all side slopes that is listed in spec section 35 20 23–3.3.7.1 ?

Answer: See answer to PPI#23

PPI #93. As the contractor is ultimately responsible for eliminating spillage as a permit requirement, can the requirement for 2-ft below the containment height of the barge be eliminated to allow greater flexibility in barge configuration?

Answer: See answer to PPI#24

PPI #94. Please consider removing the need for a “certified marine surveyor” to perform daily barge inspections. This duty is better served by a qualified person or engineer with dredging experience provided by the contractor.

Answer: See answer to PPI#26

PPI #95. In spec section 35 31 19 – 3.5.1 Table 6: Is the carbon in place concentration percentage by weight or by volume?

Answer: See answer to PPI#27

PPI #96. How is the “vertical distribution” of the carbon going to be determined?

Answer: See answer to PPI#28

PPI #98. Please provide as-builts for the existing boathouse.

Answer: Demolition Drawings sheets incorporate the existing condition of the boat house.

See sheet AD408.

PPI #100. Note 117 on CD106 indicates that the existing armory is to be relocated. Please provide location for relocation.

Answer: Per Note 5 on Sheet CD106, the armory will be relocated as directed by the USCG Contracting Officer or their designated representative to a location on Base Seattle Owned Property.

PPI #101. Note 113 on CD106 indicates that existing connex boxes are to be relocated. Please provide location for relocation.

Answer: Per Note 5 on Sheet CD106, the connex boxes, boat storage tent, and multipurpose tent will be relocated as directed by the USCG Contracting Officer or their designated representative to a location on Base Seattle Owned Property.

PPI #102. Please provide full as-builts for building 3 Answer: Demolition Drawings sheets incorporate the existing condition of bldg. 3. See sheet AD400 and AD407.

PPI #103. Please provide geotechnical report for soils under building 3. Are these to be assumed contaminated?

Answer: The CG does not have any reports on contaminated soil below Building 3, contractors should follow specification procedures for if they encountered a suspected hazardous material not previously identified in the contract documents.

PPI #105. E1 / TW501 does not show insulation or freeze protection for temporary pressurized piping. Please advise if this will be necessary.

Answer: See TW101, note 6 for temporary water line freeze protection requirements. Freeze protection and insulation is not required for the temporary sanitary sewer line shown in the TW series drawings.

PPI #166. The Task Order Announcement lists a Proposal Acceptance Period of 90 calendar days from the receipt of the Price Proposal. Per Amendment 2, the Price Proposal submission date is April 30, 2025. 90 calendar days from that date is July 29, 2025. Per the NMACC Site Visit document provided in Amendment 1, the Estimated Award Date is August 30, 2025. If the Government intends to wait until late-August to Award this project, that is after the bid validity period. Please adjust whichever date is incorrect.

Answer: Currently the approximated award date is anticipated to occur on or about August 30, 2025. Adjustment to the award date may occur via amendment. It is possible that the submission date for the Price Proposal may also be adjusted via amendment.

PPI #167. The Task Order Announcement lists a Performance Period of 1,200 calendar days after the award of the Task Order. Please provide the anticipated Award date to allow the Contractor to understand the timeframe when this project will occur in the preparation of both the Price Factor and Non-Price Factor (2) Schedule/Phasing proposal submissions.

Answer: Currently the approximated award date is anticipated to occur on or about August 30, 2025. Adjustment to the award date may occur via amendment.

PPI #168. Specification Section 01 11 00, Paragraphs 1.2.3a, b, and c: Please provide the anticipated Notice to Proceed (NTP) date to allow the Contractor to anticipate when this project will start and understand what the interim milestone dates are in the preparation of both the Price Factor and Non-Price Factor (2) Schedule/Phasing proposal submissions.

Answer: Currently the approximated award date is anticipated to occur on or about August 30, 2025. This date is subject to change via amendment to the solicitation. The Notice to Proceed will be provided to the successful Offeror upon award.

PPI #170. Specification Sections 01 14 00, Paragraph 1.4.5, and Section 01 57 19, Paragraphs 1.1, 1.3.1, and 1.4.1: Please provide the referenced USCG/Muckleshoot Tribal MOA and the USCG/Suquamish Tribal MOA documents. These documents are needed in the preparation of both the Price Factor and Non-Price Factors proposal submissions.

Answer: The Coast Guard is still working with the tribes on finalizing the MOA's. The current specifications outline the major requirements necessary to bid the project. If MOAs are finalized post award, the Government will determine if a contract modification is required.