RFI Answers 1st Batch.docx

RFI Answers

1. Please specific whether applicable code for this modernization is ASME A17.1 (2019) or ASME A17.1 (2022)?

DISCUSSION: There are significant differences between code years and the Specifications only occasionally discussion or reference 2019 code or later. The generic use of A17.1 absent code year throughout the document is ambiguous as to what is the actual Standard—2019 or 2022— required for this elevator modernization.

Per the VA requirements, the latest version of ASME A17.1 code shall be applicable to the alterations made; however, the VA has the right to modify or reject requirements within the code that they feel conflict with the VA published standards. For the purpose of pricing the work, it should be assumed any work performed shall be in compliance with the latest version of the A17.1 code unless specifically indicated by the VA.

2. Is a dedicated Site Superintendent Required?

DISCUSSION: Normally a Dedicated Site Superintendent is required who also serves as SSHO for projects were multiple trades and multiple crews are working in different buildings at the same time. While Section 01 35 26 discusses what constitutes a competent SSHO, there is no corresponding Section or discussion as to what constitutes a “Competent Superintendent” though Section 01 45 00 (Quality Control) Para 3.1 states the Project (Site) Superintendent is responsible for the quality of work. Given other trade work like building ramps and structural repairs and plumbing, it appears counter to VA interests to duel-hat the Elevator Mechanic In Charge (MIC) as the Site Superintendent or SSHO given Elevator Mechanic’s possess limited familiarity with Other Trade Building Codes and Safety Standards.

A dedicated site superintendent is required for the duration of the contract.

3. Please identify whether to refurbish or replace motors for Traction Elevators. If refurbishment, does this include testing, providing pre- and post-refurbishment test results? The applicable standard the refurbished motors are to satisfy? Is nitrogen aerosol cleaning required?

DISCUSSION: Section 14 21 10 Tables and Paragraphs discuss refurbish motors without identifying what constitutes refurbishment or the applicable Standard for the motors, such as ANSI/EASA Standard AR100-2105. This is in conflict with E-series Plans Sheets’ Keynotes #1 stating to replace motors and machines. If motors are retained, we need specificity as to pre- and post-refurbishment testing and test results are required, whether internal motor cleaning is required, and any other tests the VA wants to ensure the elevator motors are in good service condition after refurbishment.

Contractors shall use industry methods to assure the existing AC motors will operate as per the performance requirements indicated in the specifications and provide reliable operation that can be properly warranted in compliance with the specifications. If a contractor feels they cannot provide such a guarantee, they can provide a new replacement motor with the same characteristics and compatibility with the existing machines if they so choose.

Section 14 21 10 shall govern the scope of work for the elevators.

4. Please identify the elevator machine parts required to satisfy the machine refurbishment requirement? Will refurbishment require Factory-Trained/Authorized certification of alignment and calibration?

DISCUSSION: Section 14 21 10 Tables and discussion state to refurbish machines without identifying the minimum tests and test reports the motors are to be required parts the Offeror is to replace for each machine, and whether or not a factory-trained/authorized certification of alignment or calibration required. There is significant cost difference between a minimal refurbishment that replaces bearings and seals relative to a “full” refurbishment that includes drive parts and gears.

The existing machines identified to be retained and refurbished shall have all work indicated in section 2.18 of 14 21 10 that details the refurbishment requirements. Work shall be performed per the manufacturers’ requirements, which are available to all contractors. It is the contractor’s responsibility to review the existing conditions and execute such work required for compliance with the specifications.

5. Please modify Specification Tables and Paragraphs to retain platform subfloors unless inspection reveals a deteriorated subfloor warranting replacement.

DISCUSSION: The Tables and Section 14 21 10 Para 2.48 I and 14 24 10 Para 2.37 I identify replacing the subfloor though the existing sub-floors—as evident by observing the top floor surface—strongly suggest the subfloors are in good structural condition and the cab platforms are being retained. Given the subfloors are designed to be serviceable for the life of the platform and integrated into the platform, there is considerable cost to replace for no gain in service life unless the subfloor is obviously compromised—which is not the case for any of the 6 elevators we looked at.

As indicated in the specifications, replace all existing wooden subfloors on platforms being retained with new subfloors as specified. (2 layers of ¾” marine grade plywood).

6. Please identify the ATS location in the Plans specific to each Traction Elevator listed in Section 14 21 00.

DISCUSSION: Required to identify the distance PTS Carrier wire and conduit must run.

Existing ATS locations are listed below:

Building 6: Room B16 (Basement) Building 7: Room B10 (Basement) Building 62: Room B23A (Basement)

7. Please clarify Section 14 24 00 1.13 (Emergency Power) guidance specific to Hydraulic elevators. Do the Hydraulic Elevators require emergency power rather than battery lowering? If the former, please identify the ATS location in the Plans specific to each elevator?

DISCUSSION: Section guidance, like Para 1.13 B, applies to traction elevators. If the hydraulic elevators are to operate off of Emergency Power rather than battery lowering, the location of each respective ATS is required to measure the distance from ATS to the Elevator for the Emergency Power Notification Light conduit and carrier pair, and any additional service wire that may be required.

Hydraulic elevators in Buildings 10 & 62 require emergency power. Hydraulic elevator in Building 9 requires battery lowering. All existing ATS locations are listed below:

Building 6: Room B16 (Basement) Building 7: Room B10 (Basement) Building 9: No ATS. Elevator not on generator emergency power and does require battery lowering.

Building 10: Room B24 (Basement) Building 62: Room B23A (Basement) – both elevators are served from the same ATS

8. Please identify the Emergency Power Panel and breaker position in the Plans that service the Machine Room Car Lighting Panel for each of the 6 elevators.

DISCUSSION: Both Sections 14 21 00 Para 1.15 D and 14 24 00 Para 1.13 D identify Car Lighting Circuits that receive their power from a distant Facility Emergency Power Panel. The remote location of these servicing panels, and available or dedicated breaker positions (slots) are not shown in the plans—just the Machine room panels. NOTE: It would appear Emergency Power Panels may be some distance and difficult to route conduit.

These are listed below:

Building 6: Panel EQ7 in Penthouse, Circuit #16 Building 7: Panel EQ-D in Penthouse, Circuit #4 Building 9: No labels were observed during our field visits and could not be determined from existing documentation. We believe this may be powered from Panel L9B in Basement Corridor.

Building 10: Panel L10-C in Stairwell #1, Circuit #8 Building 62: Panel EQ in Room B23A (Basement), Circuits #19 & #35

All circuits shall be field verified.

9. Are the machine room floors to receive a new applied coating?

DISCUSSION: Section 09 91 00 discussion does not identify if the Machine Room Floors are to be recoated.

No, the contract documents do not identify work requiring coating the machine room floors.

10. Please identify the company currently maintaining the fire service systems for the buildings?

Fire Equipment Incorporated is the current Fire Systems maintenance contractor

11. When was the fire system last tested for the elevator and what were the results of the test?

DISCUSSION: Please provide results from the last fire test and last test date. This seeks to identify any deficiencies that may currently exist in the fire system in relation to the elevator. If this information cannot be provided the assumption is that all existing elevator related devices are functional and any integration / replacement / programming is limited to what is explicitly listed in the SOW.

Last Annual testing for the FA system on campus was conducted in February 2024.

Reports are attached.

12. Is the VA directing Car Emergency Signaling Devices required by A17.1 Rule 2.27.1.1 (2019) and later code? Just provisioning controller, COP and travel cable? Full offsite duplex data exchange?

DISCUSSION: Video and remote voice may not be compatible with VA’s HIPAA and network security policies.

Per AE, based on feedback from the VA, they have provisionally indicated they will not be complying with A17.1 Rule 2.27.1.1 of 2019 or later code for this project. As such, provisions shall be included for the future addition of such devices if determined by the VA within reason such as spare wiring.

Per COR, the VA is not complying A17.1 Rule 2.27.1.1 of 2019 or later code for this project.

13. Please identify if Contractor or Facility is to provide and pay the monthly service fee for the 2nd telephone line required for ASME A17.1 (2019) and beyond communications.

DISCUSSION: Specifications rePar 2.0(D) does not clarify if the Facility or Contractor is to pay the service fee for the 2nd phone line that is required to meet 2019 code.

A second telephone line is not required for this project.

14. Please confirm whether the Access Ramps are to be built in compliance with ADA-ABA, Mass AAB or VA BARRIER FREE DESIGN STANDARD-PG-18-13, REV 02?

DISCUSSION: Specifications identify the former. The Plans Sheets identify the latter and they vary considerably between them.

The VA Barrier Free Design Standard is a supplement to the Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standard (ABAAS) by adding more stringent stipulations to the ABAAS. Because this is a VA facility the contractor will need to comply with the VA Barrier Free Design Guide which would require compliance with ABAAS as well.

15. Please identify required slip resistance for Access Ramp?

DISCUSSION: Not identified in Specifications or Plans yet required in Para 01 50 2.1A.1.

Comply with the more stringent requirements of VA Barrier Free Design Standard/ Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standard (ABAAS). The slip resistance should be that for exterior conditions.

16. Please confirm maximum allowable ramp slope is 1:20?

DISCUSSION: VA BARRIER FREE DESIGN STANDARD-PG-18-13, REV 02 is more restrictive than the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) Standard, yet makes allowances for greater maximum slope on short runs. We need to confirm the maximum acceptable slope.

The maximum allowable ramp slope is 1:20 as identified in Drawing GI002.

17. Please confirm minimum ramp width of 48” is inclusive of a typical 2”x 4” edging and handrail mounting that reduces effective width to 41”?

DISCUSSION: Ramp Width in VA BARRIER FREE DESIGN STANDARD-PG-18-13, REV 02 is greater than required by Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) Standard. Placing edging and handrailing within the 48” width enables the contractor to use 4’ x 8’sheets for the run, which is most-cost effective and meets the ABA Standard.

Comply with the more stringent requirements of VA Barrier Free Design Standard/ Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standard (ABAAS).

18. Please provide maximum load bearing require for access ramps?

DISCUSSION: VA BARRIER FREE DESIGN STANDARD-PG-18-13, REV 02 discusses dimensions but does not provide required load bearing. Given the access ramps are to move service carts, knowing the load they must be constructed to is critical to using the proper materials.

Comply with the more stringent requirements of VA Barrier Free Design Standard/ Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standard (ABAAS). MA Building Code would require 100psf with 2000# concentrated load.

19. Do the access ramps’ design require a licensed engineer?

DISCUSSION: One ramp’s vertical exceeds 7 ft, but not addressed in the Plans or Specifications.

The ramp shop drawing should include a PE stamp.

20. Request more detailed structural investigation of Bldg 10 Porch slab and railing corrosion as it appears removing the existing slab and replacing with a new slab is warranted?

DISCUSSION: Our Civil background in bridge spall repairs suggests further investigation is warranted as the Porch’s reinforcing steel is beyond its service life. We expect such investigation to reveal corrosion extents far further than assumed, with little to nil tensile strength, that renders moot a ‘clean and coat’ repair. Per the attached images, In observable rods alone show spalling and flaking indicative of high chloride concentration in the concrete from years of salting the porch. We will chase rust the full length of the rods, and once cleaned, will find other instances where there’s literally no steel left to coat. As such, it is more effective and less costly to remove and replace this porch concrete than try to salvage and repair as indicated in Plans Sheet S-501. NOTE: When we opened the access door to the confined space adjacent to the machine room, it was very damp and ceiling deteriorating as well.

Bids shall be based on the scope shown on the Construction Documents. During construction, if a less-expensive alternate exists, it can be considered at that time.

21. Request more detailed structural investigation of Bldg 10 Porch railing, threshold and steps? Request consideration of replacing rather than repairing?

DISCUSSION: The wrought iron porch railing at the Bldg 10 porch is structurally unsound—see photos. The threshold is broken and separating from the sill, and the steps are breaking and pulling away from the structure. These are not address in the Plans but appear warranted given the VA is going to the trouble of fixing it as the Machine Room Ceiling.

Replacing the existing wrought iron railing is acceptable while also meeting Historical Preservation requirements.

22. Request guidance on whether porch-related (induced) corrosion should be addressed in the Bldg 10 Stairwell leading from the porch to the machine room?

DISCUSSION: The interior metal stairs adjacent to the porch are corroding due to water penetration from the adjacent wall where the confined space under the porch has lost water integrity. Should we clean, repair and recoat the stairs or let them continue to corrode?

The interior stairs are not part of the scope of this project.

23. Please provide Reuland Motor Data Tag for elevators E6 and A7?

DISCUSSION: SECTION 14 21 10 MODERNIZATION OF ELECTRIC TRACTION ELEVATORS PART 1 GENERAL 1.1 DESCRIPTION. Since the spec calls for retaining the machines, we would need to know if the new drive is compatible.

It is the responsibility of the contractor to review the existing conditions and capture existing motor data tags and other similar information for properly pricing the project.

24. Please confirm the total travel length of each of the three (3) hydraulic units.

DISCUSSION: Not able to verify as part of site visits—time issue.

It is the responsibility of the contractor to review the existing conditions and verify measurements required for the pricing of the project.

25. Does Service Maintenance for all 6 elevators commence with the month that the first elevator is removed from service though several elevators will not be removed from service for several months?

DISCUSSION. 3.8 ELEVATOR GUARANTEE PERIOD OF SERVICE: MAINTENANCE SERVICE AND INSPECTIONS. It is unclear what to do about service maintenance of elevators subject to modernization yet to be modernized.

The maintenance period is on a per elevator basis.

The contractor is only required to conduct maintenance on the elevators they have “touched” with any elevators that have not had the modernization started staying under the existing elevator maintenance contract.

26. Please confirm provided Storage Space is internal to the Building-Tunnel system rather than exterior to the buildings?

DISCUSSION: Clarification.

Storage spaces can be determined upon award and mobilization.

I will try to find internal locations for storage, but there is no guarantee for size or especially the location of the storage area (i.e. in another bldg.) in respect to all work sites covered under the contract.

27. Please identify the 110V/220V Service Panel and Breaker Position for Bldg 7 Elevator Pit Lighting and Receptacle.

DISCUSSION. There’s no pit lighting or receptacle with no indicating in the Plans where we are to draw power from and land the 110V circuit for lighting and a GFCI Receptacle.

No labels were observed during our field visits and could not be determined from existing documentation. We believe this may be powered from Panel 7EQ2 in Room B13A (Basement). Panel and circuit shall be field verified.

28. Request consideration of a Daikan rather than Trane Split systems.

DISCUSSION: We have been directed by other VAMC’s to install non-US split systems as their preferred system to maintain.

A/E does not oppose Daikin being installed. Trane was used as the Basis of Design or Approved Equal because of the existing BAS enterprise system. The VA has final say.

Per COR, other manufacturers are acceptable as long as they meet all specifications and compatibility to existing systems (e.g. BAS).

29. Request consideration of Wall-Mounting the Outdoor Unit?

DISCUSSION: We typically wall-mount these smaller units to avoid being damaged by ground’s maintenance and avoid being buried in snow.

A/E prefers not to drill into the existing building envelope. The current design shows 24” H. rails under each unit and is consistent with the adjacent units on the property. What is the proposed height from grade the Contractor will be installing the outdoor units? The VA has final say, but the current design has been vetted through the design process with the VA.

Per COR, pursuing wall mounting the outdoor unit can be discussed during construction.

30. Request replacing Para 22 14 29 3.3A “Manufacturer’s Technical Representative” with “Installer.”

DISCUSSION: The installing technician is more-than-qualified to provide training on the Sump Pumps and associated controls as they are rather rudimentary relative to the skill sets and qualification of Facility Maintenance Staff. Firms like Liberty Pump don’t have local Manufacturer Technical Representatives to travel to provide 4 hour operator/maintainer instruction.

The A/E does not disagree. Testing the internal components of the float enabling the pump is very rudimentary. However, the A/E would like to go on record for documenting:

1. Building 9 will require oil detection testing, BAS and FA communication verification, and documented multi-meter testing to ensure battery system is performing as specified.

2. Building 10 will require oil detection testing and BAS and FA communication verification.

Building 62 has no special testing required.

Per COR, VA concurs with the A/E assessment.

31. Please confirm no oil-water separators are required to support the Hydraulic Elevator Sump Pumps.

DISCUSSION: None shown in plans or discussed in specs.

Confirmed, depending on which pump is being submitted for review. The Basis of Design or Approved Equal is a Stancor Oil Minder that uses oil detection to stop the pump. As the water fills back up and the oil separates to the top, the pump operates again until the oil hits the sensor; this action repeats.

32. Request Autocad drawing (.dwg) files for each building we are modernizing an elevator in?

DISCUSSION: Required for Fire Life Safety Design, Electrical Design, HVAC and As Builts.

Scaled drawings were provided as part of the solicitation. If required, AutoCAD drawings may be provided after award.

33. Request relocating Penthouse Wall Mounted Split Unit Evaporator for Bldg 62 to the Southwest to align Condensate Drain to eliminate Condensate Pump? Request similar movement for other Penthouse Units to eliminate Condensate Pumps.

DISCUSSION: Condensate Pumps have a short service life and prone to blockages. It is far better to align condensate drain piping to remove condensate by gravity feed rather than condensate pump. This simplification will save VA cost and headaches over the life of the split units.

The A/E does not oppose to the Contractor offering a better solution to equipment arrangement. However, the A/E would like the opportunity to review the suggestions via submitted Plan drawings by the Contractor so everyone can put eyes on the recommendations. The cost of the condensate pumps should not hold up the bid process.