The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
36C10F23R0013 | PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY (PPI)
PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY (PPI) FORM
FT. LOGAN NATIONAL CEMETERY
PHASE 1A EXPANSION (CONSTRUCTION FY23 RE-PROCUREMENT)
| Question No. |
| Reference (Sect/Para/Page) |
| QUESTION |
| GOVERNMENT RESPONSE |
| 1 |
| Pg. 14 – Key Personnel (Project Manager, QCM) |
| Bachelor’s degree is required for Project Manager and QCM – in lieu of degree are years of experience being considered? If yes of experience would be considered, what are the thresholds for each role? Wouldn’t the Govt prefer to have someone with direct years’ experience in these roles, over a degree and potentially only 2yrs (as called out for CQC in SPEC)? |
| See edited Sub-factor description in amendment A0001 for information related to Project Manager education and experience. The requirement for the CQM remains unchanged as the specification 01 45 00 requires the CQM to hold a degree. The offeror should submit their personnel that best meet the requirements. |
| 2 |
| LEED |
| Will Ft. Logan pursue LEED Silver Certification or just follow LEED guidelines, if just following LEED guidelines does a separate LEED Coordinator need to be submitted? |
| LEED requirements are given for Commissioning process for Building Systems Commissioning, both fundamental and enhanced. At no place within the RFP nor the Specifications is “Silver” identified. Certified is assumed at 40 – 49 points |
| 3 |
| Commissioning Manager |
| Can CQC act as Commissioning Manager or does it need to be a stand-alone support role? |
| Commissioning manager shall be a separate role from CQC manager. |
| 4 |
| Pg 15 – Capacity to Perform Work |
| RFP requests current projects with dollar amounts of major subcontractors – this list would be extensive, as subcontractors can have several jobs at one time, with hundreds of employees on those jobs – please clarify request, as this information will exceed the required page limitation. Or provide a threshold for contracts so exclude contracts less than $500,000 |
| Major subcontractors should be listed with address and contact information. |
| 5 |
| Factor 2 – Capacity to Perform Work |
| Please confirm separate sub-factors are not required for Quality or Safety |
| Describe the Contractor’s capacity to perform the work if contract is awarded to the Contractor. Identified in Sub-Factor 1.2 – Project Organizational Chart and Key Personnel |
| 6 |
| Solicitation pg. 15 SSHO, Specification 01 00 01, pg. 1, 01 35 26-1.8 Training |
| Solicitation states SSHO is to have a OSHA, General Requirements 01 00 01 – 1.1 G – “all employees of GC or Sub having supervisory responsibility shall have a 10hr – and then in 01 35 26 – A – it calls out OSHA 30hr for designated CPs – which is to be followed, and what is defined difference between supervisory responsibility vs. competent person? Isn’t a CP typically a foreman and supervisor of crew? |
For Key Personnel in RFP what is requirement referenced in 01 35 26 – the 10hr for supervisory personnel?
Refer to 01 35 26 – 1.2 Definitions for QP/CP.
OSHA 30 is required for all supervisory personnel, 10 Hour for all workers, ref.01 35 26 1.8.D and 01 35 26 1.4.B.f.4 Training
| 7 |
| Specification 01 00 01-1.4 G – Guards |
| Spec calls to provide Guards, will Guards be required on project and should be included in project cost? |
| C. Guards 1 states “if deemed necessary” this is a GC decision only. |
| 8 |
| Specification 01 00 01-1.4 E.7 – Document Control |
| General Contractors typically do not have access to EDMS, is this going to be a requirement on project? |
| Document control will be accomplished in the VA required Kahua platform. Kahua is a requirement on this project. |
| 9 |
| Specification 01 00 01-1.6, H |
| Table is blank, to account for phasing operations and proper scheduling – please provide table completed. |
| Phasing has not been decided. AE will work with the VA to decide after project award. |
| 10 |
| Specification 01 00 01-1.21 New Telephone Equipment |
| GC can provide all means of setting up infrastructure of telephone equipment, but cannot coordinate the set-up of accounts, will VA IT be involved in this process and how much notice is required to ensure it is complete prior to turning building over? |
| Coordination with VA IT should begin at NTP and initial schedule development to establish lead time. |
| 11 |
| Spécification 01 00 01 – 1.28 Construction Digital Images- B. |
| Must construction images be taken by a commercial photographer, or can other means be taken to ensure the photos meet specification requirements? |
| The use of a professional photographer may be waived by the SRE through a written request by the GC. Drone images may be substituted upon SRE approval. |
| 12 |
| Specifications 01 00 01-1.34 VA PMIS |
| Kahua is called out for use on project, must Kahua be used or can Procore or another means be used? |
Contractor provided 2 licenses does not support the key personnel called out to be active and use program – please increase license to a minimal of 5 users.
Kahua is the required software. VA will provide two licenses to contractor.
| 13 |
| Specification 01 33 23-5 |
| 1.6 Submittal and Format Transmission instructs Contractor to provide submittals via email, however, 01 00 01 is calling out Kahua, please clarify (in addition being sent to Contracting Officer, why not SRE/RE) |
| Transmission of documents under this section will be via Kahua. |
| 14 |
| Specification 01 35 26 – 1.13 Tuberculosis Screening |
| Please clarify why TB testing is necessary on a cemetery construction site? Is this cost to Contractor or Govt for test? |
| TB testing is not required. Further remove 1.12 and 1.13 from 01 35 26 as they are not applicable to this project. |
| 15 |
| Specification 01 45 00 – 3.1 General Requirements |
| 3.1 entire paragraph is unclear – speaks to project superintendent being QC, as well as highest level manager at the project site, etc. Where do QC and Project Manager fit in, with this description? |
| States the “Project Superintendent will be held responsible…”. All quality is the ultimate responsibility of the highest level on- site person. QC and PM have duties as described. |
| 16 |
| Specification 01 45 00 – Quality Control |
| This SPEC references several requirements for a Design Build Project, this is a Bid Build, please update SPEC to reflect and strike Design aspects. |
| delete Paragraph C in its entirety referencing design build as this is a DBB project |
| 17 |
| Specification 01 45 00- 3.4 Quality Control Organization |
| Experience Matrix identify several roles to be filled on project –it states they are to be physically onsite when the work is being performed, is it to be interpretated that the following positions need to be employed by the GC (and not Sub) full time to meet this requirement – are these not responsibilities of the Designer: |
1) Civil
2) Mechanical
3) Electrical
4) Structural
5) Architectural
6) Environmental
7) Submittals
8) Concrete, Pavement and Soils
9) TAB
10) Design Quality Control Manager Part C of 3.4 indicates GC must employ technical personnel as applicable for each of the listed disciplines. This can be the same person as a CM if they meet the experience requirements as a construction professional. The Design QC manager is not applicable to this section.
| 18 |
| LEED Specification |
| If LEED Silver and a LEED Coordinator is required, please provide a specification associated with this scope and update other specifications accordingly. Please also include the current LEED notebook so our team can understand the targeted points and the responsibility of the Contractor. |
| This project is not pursuing a LEED certification. |
| 19 |
| RFP pg. 14 of 80 |
| States show evidence candidate meets Health and Safety qualifications in the solicitation – is this to assume that CQC is to have 10hr OSHA as supervisory? – as stated CQC cannot have any other role than QC so performing SSHO would not be allowable, correct? |
| CQC shall not be supervisory of any Work In Progress. See item #6 above. |
| 20 |
| RFP pg. 14/15 |
| SSHO is to meet quality control and health and safety qualifications specified in the SPEC, why would the SSHO be held to QC requirements set forth in 01 45 00? |
| Spec Section 01 35 26 page 14/15 outlines training. Section 10 45 00 details QC requirements. |
| 21 |
| RFP pg. 16 |
| Request schedule to be in Gantt chart only – can a P6 schedule be provided in lieu of Gantt? P6 is required under 01 32 16.13 Spec for project use. |
| Yes, P6 schedule is required |
| 22 |
| SPEC 01 32 16.13 – Network Analysis Schedule |
| There is no schedule for weather calendar or anticipated delays – what are the anticipated weather days for each month to build schedule and is there a winter shutdown to account for in location of Denver, CO? |
| There are no anticipated weather days and they must be built into the schedule (float) at bidder's discretion based on project locale. |
| 23 |
| Sheet AD104, Det. 4/AD106, and AS103. |
| Please clarify the open ceiling scope at Building 1401 PIC Breezeway 100 between Grids B&D. Det. 4/AD106 suggests removing the wood boards perpendicular to the trusses. However, upon site investigation the boards appear to be installed on top of trusses. Additionally, Sheet AS103 Breezeway 100 between Grids B&D does not provide an elevation for the new metal flush ceiling panels but we assume the intent is to be installed on the underside of the structure following the slope. Please confirm if the existing wood boards at Breezeway 100 between Grids B&D should remain and that the new metal panels are to be installed to the underside of these boards. |
| Yes. The existing wood roof deck is installed on top of the trusses. Existing wood roof deck to remain. Apply new metal soffit directly to existing wood roof deck and follow the slope. The wood board called out in Detail 4 AD106 is to be removed and replaced with new EIFS system. See detail 4 AS105. |
| 24 |
| Sheet AD105 |
| Note 02-55 indicates to remove existing lightning rods and wiring. Coordinate with electrical drawings. We are unable to find provisions in the electrical drawings to replace the existing lightning rods and wiring with new. Please review and advise. |
| See sheet AS104 for new lightning rods. |
| 25 |
| RFP Statement of Work |
| The RFP Statement of Work (SOW) and Bid Form make reference to correct Facility Correction Deficiencies (FCA) graded as “D” or “F”, however no list of these items can be found. Please provide list or confirm the DOR has included all of these items as part of the design. |
| Facility Correction Deficiencies summary will not be provided to contractors. |
| 26 |
| Sheet ES101 |
| Sheet ES101 is found in the Base Bid Documents and Alternate 3 plan packages. For clarity, we would like to confirm base bid or the appropriate alternate number for bidding purposes. Please confirm our assumptions as follows: |
Keynote #1: Base Bid Keynote #2: Base Bid Keynote #3: Alternate #2 Keynote #4: Base Bid Keynote #5: Base Bid Keynotes 1,2 & 3 should all be included in the base bid. Keynotes 4 and 5 should be excluded from bidding.
| 27 |
| Section 01 00 01 Para 1.33 |
| Please confirm temporary PIC and public bathroom trailers will be cleaned/stocked by the cemetery cleaning service provider. |
| Contractor is responsible for cleaning of temporary facilities supplied for this contract. |
| 28 |
| Section 01 00 01 Para 1.33 |
| Is the relocated gravesite locator kiosk to be housed inside of the temporary PIC trailer? |
| Yes, or immediately outside and under cover. Must have weekend access. |
| 29 |
| Sheet AF100, Section 01 00 01 Para 1.33 |
| Please clarify which trailer furniture items on Sheet AF100 are to be new and which are furnishings to be existing as Section 01 00 01 Para 1.33 references existing furnishings to be moved from existing building. |
| All furniture in AF100 schedule is new furniture. |
| 30 |
| Sheet AF100 |
| Furniture Schedule references a “Furniture Specification Spreadsheet” but none is found in the bid documents. Please provide. |
| Yes. We have this and can provide. See attached Furniture Specification Spreadsheet. |
| 31 |
| SPEC: 03 48 21, 3.7.A |
| 03 48 21 3.7.A reads, “Prior to the backfill being placed between the crypts, a professional land surveyor shall survey the in-place crypts and provide written certification that they are within allowable tolerances installed.” Please confirm that the intent of this section was to be “Prior to backfill being placed over the top of the crypts, a professional land surveyor shall survey the in-place crypts and provide written certification that they are within allowable tolerances installed.” Drainage stone (not backfill) should be installed in between the crypts during the installation. |
| Refer to crypt detail on plans. Survey shall be certified between crypts |
| 32 |
| CS511 |
| The End View in Detail 1 shows the crypt irrigation isle backfill as drainage stone AGG. #67. Please confirm this is the intent. |
| This is a standard detail for VA projects involving crypt irrigation |
| 33 |
| Existing Spoils – Contractor Laydown Area |
| Is the contractor responsible for the removal of the existing spoils in the contractor laydown area? After removal, where will NCA spoils pile move? (Note, current spoils is not suitable material for use on site, and will need removed) |
| See note 13 on G003. Contractor to remove existing spoils in laydown area. See grading plans |
| 34 |
| RFP pg. 14/ 15 – CPM Consultant |
| Pg. 14 states that for key personnel an OSHA is required – CPM consultant is listed as key personnel, please confirm an OSHA is *not* needed for CPM consultant for submission |
| CPM consultant doesn’t need to have OSHA |
| 35 |
| RFP pg. 16 – Factor 4 – Union Labor Participation |
| Please clarify is a PLA is required or encouraged? The RFP reads for Factor 4 there is a rating, however, it is not discernable if required. Please expand on full credit, partial credit – what is this weighed on? |
| PLAs are not required or mandatory. However, should an offeror decide to include union participation in the offer (and resultant contract) you will receive credit as stated in the SSP. Factor 4 is the considered least important when compared to other factors, as stated in the RFP. |
| 36 |
| CAD Files |
| Please provide CAD files. |
| Base files are provided with this RFI repose. 2023 05 12 Pre-Bid CAD |
HW Set #3
| HW Set #3 at Door 107 requires both an electric strike and mag lock. Please clarify what is desired as it seems to be an error due to redundancy. |
| For HW Set #3 physical access controls provide electric strike, door contact, request for exit sensor, and card reader. |
| 38 |
| Section 28 10 00 Access Control |
| The City of Denver requires a Denver 3B access control permit, however we are not clear if this permit is required due to being on federal land and the government’s own access control regulations/requirements. Please review and advise if a Denver 3B access control permit is required for this project. |
| No reference in specs to adhere to local access control permits/requirements. Understood that the information from the permit most likely utilized by local law enforcement or fire marshal. Coordínate with VA prior to construction. |
| 39 |
| Section 28 20 00 Video Surveillance Para 2.6.A.5 |
| The specifications call for access system video management system. Will the VA require a badge printer and camera for the visitor management system software? |
| Unable to locate Section 2.6.A.5 in 28 20 00 that calls for badge printer and camera with visitor management software from bid package specs. Equipment and software will not be required for construction. |
| 40 |
| Section 28 10 00 Access Control |
| Will the AHJ (authority having jurisdiction) for the access control system engineered design submittal be Denver Fire Department or a Federal entity? |
| AHJ is Local not Federal. |
| 41 |
| Section 28 10 00 Access Control & Section 28 20 00 Video Surveillance |
| Specifications indicate that the existing Intrusion Detection System is a Johnson Controls System. What is the make and model of this system and to what extent shall it be integrated with the Access Control & Video Surveillance System? The Specified Lenel access control system is capable of arm/disarm of the intrusion detection with valid credentials. |
| Johnson Controls Systems is existing and will need to be field determined for the make and model. |
| 42 |
| Section 28 10 00 Access Control Para 2.7 |
| Will the Access control system integrator for this project be responsible for adding the PIV Cards provided by host station Security Service to the access control system? Approximately how many cards will be provided, and will they be provided in a CSV format? |
| Submit your assumption for PIV cards and format. This will be determined in the submittal process. The cards are sold in boxes of 50 or 100, pre-formatted. |
| 43 |
| Section 28 10 00 Access Control Para 3.8 & Section 28 20 00 Video Surveillance Para 3.3 |
| How many hours of end-user training shall be included for the access control and video surveillance system? |
Minimum of 4 hours.
| 44 |
| Section 28 20 00 Video Surveillance and Sheets TK101 & TK102 |
| Please elaborate on the state of the existing video surveillance system equipment (if any)? |
No existing video surveillance infrastructure within the project site.
| 45 |
| Section 28 10 00 Access Control & Section 28 20 00 Video Surveillance |
| How many days of storage will be required for the video management system per the recording specifications? It is currently not specified. |
| Assume 30 days. |
| 46 |
| Section 28 20 00 Video Surveillance Para 2.1.C.3.C |
| Specification page 28 20 00 – 2: 3. Security Access Detection: Letter c. “Provide CCTV System with facial recognition software to assist in identifying individuals for current and future purposes.” Does the VA have an existing facial recognition software/database that will be integrated? Is the intent of the software to identify individuals in real time or after the fact? |
| Assume real-time. |
| 47 |
| Section 28 10 00 Access Control |
| Will the specified access control system tie into the federal bridge? |
Future tie-in capabilities for video surveillance to the rocky mountain regional VA office will be required.
| 48 |
| Section 28 20 00 Video Surveillance Para 2.2 |
| What size of video display equipment/monitors will be required for the video surveillance system? |
| CCTV system riser diagrams in construction documents specify 24” and 27” monitors in the Admin/Maintenance building. |
| 49 |
| 06 20 00 – Fiber Cement Panel Siding and Trim, 1.3 |
| 1.3 references SPEC 01 81 11, Sustainable Design Requirement, this SPEC is not provided as part of RFP, please either strike or provide SPEC |
| Strike if not provided in front end specs. |
| 50 |
| 07 08 00 – 1.2 Related Work |
| 01 33 00 Submittal Procedures is referenced, not part of RFP package, please provide SPEC or strike (in all areas) |
| Strike if not in Front end specs |
| 51 |
| 07 21 13 – 1.2 Related Work |
| Section 07 40 00, Roofing and Siding Panel, RFP provides: 07 40 00 metal soffit panels. 07 22 00, roof and decking insulation – 07 22 00 is not provided in RFP, please provide |
| Strike from section. not provided. |
| 52 |
| 07 24 00 |
| RFP goes from 1.1 to 1.3, is there a section 1.2 related work to be provided? |
| No section 1.2. no related work to be provided. 1.2 is for sustainability requirements. |
| 53 |
| 07 54 19 |
| 1.2 B – roof insulation – section 07 22 00, not provided as part of this RFP, please strike, or provide |
| Strike from section. not provided. |
| 54 |
| 07 45 19 |
| Goes from 1.3 to 1.5, 1.4 is missing – is it needed? |
| There is no specification 07 45 19. Do you mean 07 54 19? No section 1.4 is required. |
| 55 |
| 08 71 00 – 1.2 Related Work |
| Card Readers is to be in Section 28 13 11, Physical Access Control Systems – this SPEC is not in RFP |
| Change section in related work to 28 10 00 Access Control |
| 56 |
| 09 06 00 Schedule of Finishes |
| Schedule of Finishes are provided for following SPECs not in RFP: 1) 07 71 00 Roof Specialties, 07 72 00 Roof Accessories, 08 89 00 Louvers and Vents (should read 08 90 00), 09 65 16 Resilient Sheet Flooring, 10 56 13 Steel Shelving, |
| Both sections 07 71 00 and 07 72 00 are under specification section 07 60 00 Flashing and Sheet Metal. No section 07 71 00 and 07 72 00 in schedule of finishes. |
08 89 00 – Yes, it should be 08 90 00.
09 65 16 – should be 09 65 19 Resilient Tile Flooring.
10 56 13 – strike 105613 steel shelving from section G. 10 51 13 metal lockers to remain.
| 57 |
| 09 24 00 Portland Cemetery Plastering |
| Schedule of Finishes do not call out room finish schedule and color – please provide |
| There is no specification section 09 24 00 in schedule of finishes or specification section in TOC. |
| 58 |
| 09 65 19 Resilient Tile Flooring |
| Schedule of Finishes do not call out color, pattern and texture of this flooring and accessories – please provide |
| Change section 09 65 16 Resilient Sheet Flooring to 09 65 19 Resilient Tile Flooring. Also change section schedule to Vinyl Composition Tile (LVT). Change finish schedule code to LVT1 to match drawings finishes schedule. |
| 59 |
| 09 91 00 Painting |
| 1.2 Related Work, B – Contractor Options 08 14 00 Wood Doors, not in RFP |
| Section 1.2.B - Strike from specification. |
| 60 |
| 10 14 00 Exterior Signage – 2.9 Bronze Plaques |
| Will the Space Force Seal be added to the Ft. Logan Project? Who is an approved VA to provide the Space Force Seal? |
| Yes, there is to be a Space Force seal in the project at the PIC building. see detail 2 sheet AS105 and keynote 10-14. Furthermore, see details on As301. Provide per VA requirements. |
| 61 |
| SPEC 26 57 00 CORS System Requirements |
| This SPEC is not on TOB and unclear the reference, as pages 1129-1155, appear to be guidance not on project – please clarify |
| Spec related to performance and installation requirements of CORS antenna called for installation on the administrative building complex. |
| 62 |
| SPEC 27 10 00 – Structured Cabling |
| 2.1 B – TIP: standalone, local access controls connected to remote VA Medical Center central station – clarify why VA Cemetery needs to remove into VA medical center? – please review entire SPEC as it references in multiple areas hosting back to central medical and clarify to cemetery ops |
| Contractor to bid based on intent of specification work related cemetery site. No medical VA work required. |
| 63 |
| SPEC 28 10 00 – 3.8 Training |
| 3.8 B.1.e – contractor is to provide training as it pertains to patches that may impact VA specific IT protocols – where does contractor obtain VA specific IT protocols to fulfill this training? |
| Training is to be reviewed and approved by SRE prior to the 30 day notification to the Station. Will be determined in the submital process. |
| 64 |
| SPEC 28 20 00 |
| There are not submittals listed for this specification – what submittals are expected? |
| For the LOW -VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL POWER CONDUCTORS AND CABLES section reference 26 05 19. Intrusion detection system is existing to remain and maintained by JCI the only work required is that the existing systems tie-into new surveillance and access control systems. Spec section 28 31 00 will not be required. |
| 65 |
| SPEC 32 05 23 - |
| 1.2 Related Requirements – references 05 50 00 Metal Fabrications – not part of this RFP, please provide |
| The reference is not included in this specification |
| 66 |
| SPEC 32 05 23 – 1.5 D. Samples 2 |
| Colored concrete panel: as specified in 09 06 00 schedule of finish – not provided, please provide color for accurate bid pricing on color |
| See plans, require match existing colors used at Ft Logan Cemetery Columbarium's. |
The columbarium uses Limestone caps and wayfinding insets.
| 67 |
| Mock-Ups |
| Are mock-up required on project? If required, do they need to be separate or can be incorporated into work as final? Will the RE Office allow mock-up’s to be constructed at the actual location of placement? |
| Yes, please prepare mock ups for those items requested within the plans and specifications. |
| 68 |
| SPEC – Preinstallation Meeting |
| In various SPEC section for Pre-Installation Meeting attendees vary from Geotechnical Engineer, Designer, VA IT, COR, etc. please confirm it is no cost to the General Contractor for these individuals to be in attendance (called out at the project site) – and will be coordinated attendance (in person) by VA |
| Staff not directly employed by GC will be paid under their respective contracts |
| 69 |
| SPEC 32 31 13 – 2.1 |
| 2.1 Basis of Design 09 06 00 – Schedule of Finishes – not present in this RFP, please provide |
| See page 499 of specifications & refer to plans |
| 70 |
| SPEC 32 31 19 2.3 A & 2.5 |
| 2.3 & 2.5 – Basis of Design 09 06 00 – Schedule of Finishes – not present in this RFP, please provide |
| See page 499 of specifications & refer to plans |
| 71 |
| SPEC 32 33 00 – 2.1 Products – General |
| 2.1 – General – Basis of Design 09 06 00 – not present in this RFP, please provide |
| See page 499 of specifications & refer to plans |
| 72 |
| SPEC 32 90 00, 1.10. B.1 |
| Warranty begins when Govt accepts plants and turfgrass but not before end of landscape plant and turfgrass establishment period – please define the landscape plant and turfgrass periods are? |
3.17 – establishment period begins immediately after installation – when does it end -98% coverage?
Yes, establishment is defined in section 3.17 of the section. Once the establishment is satisfied then the warranty begins. The length of establishment is not clarified, as the VA does not know when the plants and turf grass will be installed.
| 73 |
| SPEC 32 90 00 |
| Are herbicides and pesticides allowable in Colorado and so close to waterways? |
| Applicator must be licensed in the State of Colorado and will know the rules. |
| Are the buildings on the project required to achieve formal LEED certification? If they are the LEED / Commissioning coordinator responsible for any elements of the LEED certification? |
| This project is not pursuing a LEED certification. |
| If the buildings are not required to achieve LEED certification what is the role of the LEED / Commissioning Coordinator? |
| This project is not pursuing a LEED certification. |
| Within the spec sections, there is reference to VOC limits and Section 01 81 11, SUSTAINABLE DESIGN REQUIRMENTS - but there is no Section 01 81 11, SUSTAINABLE DESIGN REQUIRMENTS spec section. Is this spec section required and how does it relate to the project scope if the buildings are not to be LEED certified? |
| Specification section 01 81 13 Sustainable Submission Requirements will be added to the specifications. |
| Is a water source available onsite for earthwork operations? Who will be responsible to meter and pay for the water usage? |
| Yes, Contractor responsibility through Denver Water |
| Can you please provide a turnkey permit matrix for the project and designate which permits, fees, and oversight will be the responsibility of the contractor? |
| Contractor to determine |
| Upon review of the existing 46,434 CY stockpile at the site visit, the material is unsuitable. Please confirm this must be removed and disposed of offsite by the contractor? |
| At the time of design, this stockpile was acceptable for use and included in balance of earthwork |
| 80 |
| G-003, Note 2 |
| Can you please confirm per note 2/G-003 that the 3” grubbing layer of soil that is to be removed prior to commencing earthwork operations will be unsuitable and need to be removed from the site? |
| Note 2 is correct as written |
| 81 |
| G-003, Note 3 |
| Note 3/G-003 references a 6” strip of onsite topsoil (after a 3” grubbing of the vegetative layer – note 2-G-003). Upon review of the borings, there does not appear to be a uniform 9” of vegetative/topsoil to achieve both operations. Please confirm if the site is short existing topsoil to satisfy the respread requirements, that it will need to be imported by the contractor? |
| Contractor to conduct their own assessment of soils, boring logs are for reference only. Follow specifications 31 20 00 Earth Moving and 32 90 00 Planting. |
| Please confirm if the columbarium, pump station, culvert, and all concrete flat work will need to be over excavated and conditioned? Do any other areas require over excavating? |
| The columbarium is in the plans for sub-ex, all concrete flat work will be 3’ of sub-ex, The new roads sub-ex are on the plans for of 3’. The final 3’ of fill for the pump house shall me moisture conditioned. |
It is not clear what the mention of the culvert is referring to.
| Please confirm if the onsite soil has rock or debris, it will need to be screened prior to being used as fill? |
| Contractor to conduct their own assessment of soils |
| Will the VA issue As-builts from previous work that took place at Ft. Logan NC? |
| Access to As Built information will be provided after Award |
| The Plans do not provide thickness of the concrete pads that are to be removed. Overall thickness is needed to calculate tonnage. Please clarify. |
| Concrete pad thicknesses are not known and are believed to vary. |
| Demolition Plans do not provide thickness of Gravel Road(s) that are to be removed. Overall thickness is needed to calculate tonnage. Please clarify. |
| Existing gravel road thicknesses are not known and are believed to vary. |
| The Demolition Plans call out a minor number of types and size of storm runs that are to be demo and removed from the site. However, there are many storms runs that are to be demo and removed that do not indicate the type and size of the pipe or type of storm structures. This is needed to calculate tonnage. Please clarify and will revise plan sheets be issued with this information? |
| All known sizes and materials have been included. Amended plan sheets will be issued after award. |
| The Demolition Plans do not indicate the depth of the sidewalks that are to be demo and removed. This is needed to calculate tonnage. Please clarify. |
| Sidewalk depths are not known and are believed to vary. |
| The Demolition Plans or Existing Conditions Survey do not indicate the size of the Water Main or the type of pipe that is to be demo and removed. This is needed to calculate tonnage. Please clarify. |
| Pipe size/material is unknow, subsurface investigation was not completed and as-built information has not been found |
| Throughout the Demolition Plans, Note No. 7 references the “Specifications”. Please provide what Specification and Section in the Specification is being referenced. |
| Demolition requirements are referenced throughout the specification document. |
| Will the VA allow for the Contractor to request Final Turnover/Acceptance of Burial Sections & Landscaped/Green Areas once grassing is placed and deemed acceptable for the cemetery staff to takeover for maintenance? |
| GC maintains all site features including lawns and landscape until final acceptance. |
| A lot of the restorative work for the existing roadways could be performed during the nighttime hours. This will reduce the impact to the cemetery as the Contractor works through the phasing plan. Will the VA allow for this work to be conducted in the evening hours? |
| No. Work hours are set in contract per City of Denver requirements |
| 93 |
| 32 90 00 |
| Specification32 900 00, 2.2, Item B Minimum Material Requirement (table) Organic Soil Amendment is a specification that has been used or referenced on a multitude of projects. This specification is something that appears to be applied throughout the US on every project. However, soil conditions and amended material vary greatly in every region and this specification does not account for that. Will the VA and their assigned agronomist consider reviewing this specification and relate it to actual regional conditions that are indicative for other projects throughout the Denver area? |
| Reference Spec Section 32 90 00 1.5 Submittals |
| 94 |
| 31 20 00 |
| Under Specification 31 20 00, 1.5 (Earthwork Measurement & Payment), Item A, the measurement of payment is based on a Cubic Yard amount derived from the average end area method from cross sections. What, if any, compaction factor is being utilized for this method as overall cubic yardage must consider factor to account for loose or compacted yards. |
| Up to the contractor to estimate the factor for loose or compacted yards that they want to assume. |
| 95 |
| CD107 |
| The scale on Plan Sheet CD107 depicts 1” equals 200’ horizontal and the measurement above that shows 1” equals 100’ horizonal. Additionally, when measured against curb called out at 22’ removal, the scale appears too not be correct. Please clarify. |
| Sheet scale is 1”=20’ |
| 96 |
| CD103, CD109, CD119 |
| Demolition Plan Sheets CD103, CD109 & CD119 show electrical lines that are to be removed within an existing roadway. Can you please verify if the existing lines are encased in concrete? |
| Encasement is unknown |
| 97 |
| Bid Alternates, CD110 & CD116 |
| Is the contractor required to pay for street cut permits and other permits required by Denver for the work tying into Sheridan Blvd? |
| Contractors are required to pull required permits. City and County of Denver requires the Contractors name included on the permits. |
| 98 |
| CS501 |
| Detail 5, what material are the Truncated domes to be? |
| Use cast in Place style that meets VA standards. See VA std truncated dome detail in link. https://www.cfm.va.gov/til/sDetail/Div32ExtImprov/SD320523-20.pdf |
| 99 |
| Bid Alternates, CP112 |
| Street Rehab Note #2 mentions contractor is to review APT report pavement distress maps for locations requiring removal and subgrade repair. Unable to locate these maps in the project documents, please clarify? |
| Bidder will need to discuss qualifying percentage with VA contracting officer. |
| 100 |
| Bid Alternates, CP119 |
| At approximately Sta 17+50 there are two sets of hatch one for Crack sealing and surface treatment and another for asphalt pavement removal & reconstruction. This area also appears to coincide with pavement marking cross hatch. Please confirm what is intent? |
| This area shall be crack sealing and surface treatment. The intent is to have one type of surface treatment throughout this roadway area. |
| 101 |
| Bid Alternates, CP302 |
| –Section 10 applicable streets are to be receive Crack Seal/Surface Treatment. CP-109 – CP131 shows the applicable streets being identified to receive “Crack Sealing, Surface Treatment, and Patching of Edge Cracking”. Please confirm which is correct. If these areas are to receive Edge Crack Patching please clarify extents of this patching. |
| CP-109 –CP 131 limits shall govern for crack seal/surface treatment. The APT report provided information on extents of edge cracking. Given the age of the report, additional edge crack patching may be required. A field reconnaissance review of these streets is recommended to qualify your bid. |
| 102 |
| Bid Alternates, CP302 & CP123 |
| CP-302 Section 10 is called out on Nebraska St from 10+11 to 21+34. CP-123 shows limits of as 20+60 and Full Remove & Reconstruction from 20+60 to Omaha. Please confirm which is correct? |
| Stations shown on plan sheet CP123 are correct – station 20+60 is correct. |
| 103 |
| Bid Alternates, CP302 |
| Section 13 shows a 2’ strip of HMA to be removed and replaced where edge cracking is present. Please confirm is this removal and replacement required along the full length of Omaha Dr from Sta 10+18 to 32+21 or only in select areas? If only in select areas, please clarify extents. |
| Only in select areas. The bidder will need to discuss qualifying percentage with VA contracting officer. |
| 104 |
| Bid Alternates, CP301 |
| Section 4 & 8 there are areas identified on these sections that state to Remove & Replace localized areas of Notable Distress prior to the overlay. This assessment is not able to be completed until the milling of the existing HMA is complete. Please provide percentage of area to assume to be Removed and Replaced prior to overlay operations. |
| The Notable Distress areas will be a certain percentage of the roadway area - discuss bid qualifying percentage with VA. |
| 105 |
| Bid Alternates, CP109 |
| Please confirm the work in Sheridan Blvd ROW is to conform to the details of Section 12 shown on CP-303. |
| Tie into Sheridan existing asphalt per Section 12 and then where you cut into the existing asphalt in Sheridan patch back 1” thicker than existing. |
| Can Millings be utilized in lieu of Aggregate Base on roads that are getting full depth replacement or on Gravel Access Roads? |
| RAP meeting the gradation requirements for a CDOT Class 6 Aggregate Base Course or approved equivalent may be used for roads per 32 12 16 Section 2.1 in compliance with CDOT Spec 703.04 and Table 703.-3. RAP may be used for gravel maintenance roads. |
| 107 |
| Base Bid, CU107 |
| Plan Sheet CU107 does not callout the length or type of pipe. Please clarify? |
| All dimensioning, sizing and material type are shown on plans or profiles. |
| 108 |
| Base Bid, CU301 |
| Details show CDOT Standards for Single Concrete Box Culverts (CIP). Is the intent to construct this in Phase 1A or is this a typ and should have been part of a yet TBD Phase 1B? Please clarify if Phase 1A requires installation of this apparatus. |
| Inlets and box culverts are to be constructed in Phase 1B |
| 109 |
| Base Bid, G003 |
| General Notes # references a Terracon Geotechnical Report Dated December 24, 2020, for earthwork recommendations. This report was not part of the government’s solicitation. Plan Sheets B101 to B104 provide boring information but nothing related to recommendations. Please provide the entire geotechnical report. |
| Geotechnical report has been provided with this RFI response: |
2023 05 12 Pre-Bid GEOTECH
| 110 |
| Base Bid, B111 |
| An Investigation & Assessment Final Report from Applied Pavement Technologies, Inc. for the “Renovation & Repair of Roads and Parking Areas at Fort Logan National Cemetery, Dated November 2019 is depicted on this plan sheet. In the government’s solicitation, this report was not provided. This report is critical to understand the intent and recommendations needed to perform existing roadway work. Please provide this report. |
| Geotechnical report has been provided with this RFI response: |
2023 05 12 Pre-Bid GEOTECH
In the government’s solicitation, the Terracon Geotechnical Report Dated December 24, 2020, and the Investigation & Assessment Final Report from Applied Pavement Technologies, Inc. for the “Renovation & Repair of Roads and Parking Areas at Fort Logan National Cemetery”, Dated November 2019 were not provided. Additionally, the As-builts from the previous expansion project were not provided either.
We respectfully request a time extension for the May 16, 2023, bid date. This extension will provide adequate time that can be administered to understanding and applying recommendations in these reports. Moreover, the previous expansion work As-builts provides needed information for the existing infrastructure underground that is not visible and could not be confirmed during the walk-thru. These As-builts will need to be reviewed and adequate time should be allotted for review.
The inability to review the full-blown geotechnical report, pavement repair report and As-builts from the previous expansion work justifies this request. All three of these incredibly important documents will require significant time to review and apply to the government’s price proposal. Had these reports been provided at time of solicitation then the contractor would have had the time to review prior to the walk-thru and apply recommendations in the price proposal accordingly. This time is no longer available.
Geotechnical report has been provided with this RFI response:
2023 05 12 Pre-Bid GEOTECH
| 112 |
| LI Sheets – CS Sheets |
| The Flower Watering Station count is different from the LI sheets verses the CS sheets. The CS sheet count is 8 Each and on the LI sheets there are 11 Each. What is the actual count of the FWS’s. |
| There should be 9 FWS |
| 113 |
| CS501 |
| Missing FWS Spigot Assembly Detail |
| Refer to Sheet CS202, Detail 5 for FWS faucet detail and signage. Provide a freeze proof water supply assembly through the center of the precast concrete post to the spigot. Also refer to detail 8, sheet CP501. |
Irrigation water lines run to a freeze proof spigot
| 114 |
| CS127 |
| Clarify if the 8’ bench on the 12’ x 3’ concrete pad at the single walled Columbarium is a backless or backed bench. |
| Benches along the single wall Columbarium shall be a backed bench. Backless in the plaza area only |
| 115 |
| RFP pg. 16 – Factor 3 Past Performance |
| Please clarify if a brief narrative project description and references for three (3) projects submitted under Sub-Factor 1.1 – is the *same* narrative from Sub-Factor 1.1 to be repeated (cut and paste) in Factor 3 – or just the requested information on Final CPAR, Interim CPAR or PPQ? |
| See edited description in amendment A0001 for information related projects submission for Factor 3. Projects submitted in Sub-Factor 1.1 can be the same or different projects submitted in Factor 3. |
| 116 |
| RFP Contract Duration / Add Alts |
| Please confirm if any or all Add Alts are accepted that work is to be performed within 730 calendar days, with the acceptance of add alts – add alts also be performed in that duration and no time added to schedule? |
| Contract duration is 730 Calendar Days |
Bid Alt #1, CP100 Bid Alt #4, CP100
| The Phase 4 description calls out an 8 x 12 Box Culvert & Energy Dissipator is to be constructed during this phase. Please clarify. |
| This work will be conducted during Phase 1B contracted work at a later date. |
Bid Alt #1, CP100 Bid Alt #4, CP100
| The Phase 5 description calls out an 8 x 12 RCBC is to be constructed during this phase. Please clarify. |
| This work will be conducted during Phase 1B contracted work at a later date. |
| 119 |
| Base Bid, CD102 |
| Note adjacent to Dump Site states, “Approximate Limits Existing Dump Site (Refer to Geotechnical Engineering Report) Contractor Shall Remove Any Debris During Grading Operations. It is our understanding that this area/within the Limits of Construction, was once a dump site/landfill. What are the expectations of the government as it relates to “removing any debris”. Please define the words, “any debris” and provide recommendations that are called out in the Geotechnical Report since one was not provided at time of the solicitation. |
| Geotechnical Engineer provided by the contractor should make recommendations following spec 31 20 00 Earthwork Moving. |
Geotechnical report has been provided with this RFI response:
2023 05 12 Pre-Bid GEOTECH
| 120 |
| Bid Alt #1, CP100 & G-002 |
| Phasing Sections refers to Plan Sheet CP107at intersection of Logan Blvd. & Omaha Drive. This area is shaded as being part of Phase 4 which falls under Bid Alt. #1. Sheet Index does not list CP107 as part of the plan set. Please clarify. |
| CP107 is included in ALT4 package, roadway work shown to be conducted in Phase 1B |
| 121 |
| General Requirements |
| The General requirements include provision of a Ford F150 for RE, Will the Government accept a Polaris Northstar UTV in lieu of the vehicle? |
The issue involves a company owned vehicle being driven by non-employee off-site.
Section 01 00 01, paragraph S, delete the second sentence and replace with “Two (2) new Polaris Rangers Crew XP 1000 EPS, North Star edition, newest year available.”
| 122 |
| CS503 Detail 3 |
| Detail 3 on CS503 shows the niche units bolted together. We are asking for these to be eliminated as the welding of the units together has made the bolts obsolete. Bolting the units together is rarely seen on projects today after Koppenberg Enterprise introduced the recessed weld plates at the top of the unit as the primary way the units are secured together. |
| Welding is acceptable in lieu of bolts. |
| 123 |
| CS503 Detail 2 |
| The single sided units do not indicate the units being welded together, please confirm it is the designer’s intention to not have the units welded together. The welding plates at the top |
keep the units faces aligned.
Welding is acceptable to keep the unit faces aligned
| 124 |
| CS128 |
| Access to the area to install the units is very limited, access will need to be from S. Sheridan Blvd. The GC will need to build an entrance at this location and return it to its natural state, will the VA allow this? We will have to bring the crane in to install the back-to-back units from this location. |
| The contractor shall determine the means and methods to construct |
DET 1 and 2
| Typically the an 8 wide closed precast niche unit would measure 8’-1-1/2” with 1-1/2” walls on each side. An open 8 wide niche unit would measure 8’-0”. These drawings show a ¾”walls which are too thin to maintain during setting or shipping without breaking. The middle units seem to show two open ends and those are not safe to set or ship due to breakage. |
| The awarded contractor shall provide shop drawings for review and approval, where subtle adjustments can be vetted and approved. |
| 126 |
| CS501 |
| Detail 1 Note 2 states Concrete to match Cemetery Standard. Please provide what standard color is for Fort Logan? |
Contractor to the field verify standard color in similar uses areas.
| 127 |
| CS501 & CP501 |
| There is a conflict between details for sidewalk shown on Volume 1 Set 2 & Volume 1 Set 4. Please confirm which details should used? |
The detail on CS501 is specific for sidewalks along Columbaria areas and the detail on CP501 is for the sidewalk R&R within existing streets.
| 128 |
| G004 |
| General Notes #14 – Will pre-cast inlets be allowed to be used on this project? This will provide a significant savings to the project if allowed. |
Note #14 should be followed per the plans. Specification 33 40 00, 2.6 should read: “All inlets and catch basins are to be cast-in-place unless pre-approved by the resident engineer.”
If excess suitable soil is left at the end of the project, is it able to be stockpiled onsite for future expansions similar to what was completed after the last project?
Stockpile area should be designated, and grading and stabilization is required
Can you please clarify expectations around noise pollution when working on rehabilitation of the roads? Is it expected that during funeral services in the area that crews will stop work?
Coordination between contractor for Noise Pollution work shall be coordinated with RE/Cemetery Staff to eliminate disturbance of ceremonies
| Please provide a profile of the new intake pipe for Irrigation Pump “C”. |
| No profile was done because the line is flat |
Under the project description (a)(2) says section 86-96 and 98-102 are to be 3’x4’ in-ground, Garden Niche. There do not appear to be details for these structures anywhere in the drawings. Please provide details similar to Sheet CS510 & CS511 Crypts & Oversized Crypts details.
These sections are IGC (in ground cremains. No detail is provided. The RFP document should read 4’x4’instead of 3’x4’.
Our understanding is that this project will be exempt from State taxes but not local City taxes. Can you please confirm what tax rate is required for this project?
Federal, State and Local Taxes are the responsibility of the contractor. (FAR 52.229-3)
Due to shortages related to cement, aggregate, supply chains and labor force shortcomings, will the VA allow HP or HDPE Pipe in-lieu of RCP?
Bid per plans
| 135 |
| LI504 |
| Please confirm pipe material for the 6” Fill Pipe & 3” Filter Flush Pipe shown on LI504. |
Delete 6” fill pipe, filter flush pipe is PVC underground, steel above ground where it discharges from the pump.
| 136 |
| LI107 |
| Sheet LI107 shows the new Irrigation Plan including the new Pump House. There are two lines shown as intakes on the plan, one existing and one new. Please confirm no existing pump house is at this location and the line shown as new is the correct line. |
Both lines are needed one is the intake and the other is an existing storm drain that stays. There is no existing pump house.
| 137 |
| LI107 |
| Sheet LI107 shows the new intake for the Pump House, there is a note that states “Contractor to construct coffer dam or alternative approved method to place the intake pipe at the invert elevation of 5421’, backfill coffer dam after pipe installation to existing grade.”. Can a shorter intake pipe be installed until Phase 1B when the entire lake is to be regraded? The cost to install the intake pipe is dwarfed by the cost to drain/dewater the lake, install a coffer dam, and remove a coffer dam all in the winter months in Colorado when there is a follow on contact Phase 1B that will incur many of the same activities including regrading the lake bottom. |
Install per the plans. Can not have a shorter intake pipe. This is to be done for phase 1A
Please confirm that there is an aeration system in Veterans Lake and that installation of the intake pipe may likely impact those facilities as exact locations are unknown. If available please provide a plan showing the aeration system in Veterans Lake.
The aeration plan for Veteran’s lake exists and operates. Record drawings for the system were not found by the cemetery staff.
Please confirm correct location of the intake pipe for the new pump house? The current drawings show the same line as the last time this project was bid but this new round of bidding excludes the lake grading component which adjusted the finish grade of the lake by approximately 2’.
No change was made for this intake pipe. Install per location shown on the plans.
| Please confirm what permits are in progress to facilitate the draining of Veterans Lake to install the Pump House Intake Pipe? |
| No known permit is required. Coordinate with the VA. |
Will there be any aquatic life special considerations? E.g.. Fish relocation, aquatic plant management during the draining of Veterans Lake?
The VA shall oversee and coordinate the removal of fish from Veterans Lake prior to draw down. Contractor will provide schedule to VA upon award that includes desired date for draw down.
Can you provide clarification as to the work constraints that will be put on the pumphouse work? IE is it expected that the lake will be full during the summer to allow for use to irrigate or is it acceptable drain the lakes in the summer?
Lake shall not be drained during summer watering months
| Is there any geotechnical information that can be provided for the lake bottoms as to the materials that can be expected to be experienced when constructing the pump house intake line? Also please confirm that the dirt has been tested for heavy metals and other contaminants that may impact permit conditions. |
| Geotechnical report has been provided with this RFI response: |
2023 05 12 Pre-Bid GEOTECH
| 144 |
| CP302 |
| Detail Section 15 - New Construction Roads A and B - There is no sub base shown or called out to be laid under new Asphalt, Specs and Geotechnical only addresses subgrade. Are we putting any sub base down? |
| No. Full depth asphalt over moisture treated subgrade. |
| 145 |
| CS511 |
| Details 1,2, and 3 - The #67 Drainage Aggregate between crypts in the irrigation isle and on the perimeter has been a problem for installation of irrigation and grid markers in previous National Cemetery projects. Can we use Compacted General Fill? |
| Follow the details on the plans. No Exceptions |
| 146 |
| CP302 |
| There is no detail for the 6' road behind the columbarium walls. Will Section 16 detail apply for this road? |
| Yes, Section 16 applies for the 6’ road behind the columbarium walls. |
| 147 |
| CU107 |
| Plan view of Storm 3 is having us refer to CD118 for existing demo. There is no CD118 sheet. Is Storm 3 being constructed in this base bid? |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
