Responses to RFIs_Questions (Minor Project 596-333).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 36 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Construct Replacement Community Living Center (CLC) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C24921R0059
About this file
This document contains questions and responses related to a solicitation for a construction project to build a replacement community living center at a Department of Veterans Affairs medical center. Key details include that the solicitation is for a firm fixed-price contract to provide all labor, materials, and expertise required to complete the project in accordance with contract documents, specifications, and drawings. The work may require some after-hours work or work in periods shorter than standard shifts. The anticipated award date is May 30, 2021 and the notice to proceed will be issued within 30 days of award. Bidders can use Procore for submittals and tracking and should allow 10 days for review of requests for information and 15 days for submittal reviews. A Revit model will be provided once the contractor signs a release form. Parking and laydown areas are designated on the site plan.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 26
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Semper Tek
| Semper Tek | |||
| Administrative and General: | |||
| RFI # | RFI | RFI Response | |
| 1 | RFP evaluation sub-factor 1a states that relevant experience is defined by 2 completed projects in the last 5 years. Would the government consider revising the relevancy to include both completed projects and/or projects more than 75% complete at the time of proposal submission? | No | |
| 2 | RFP evaluation sub-factor 2a states that offerors are to submit a Gantt chart schedule that is broken down into a schedule of values. Since bidding contractors often don’t receive pricing from vendors until just before the proposal due date and time it is difficult to include accurate cost values into a schedule and then print and incorporate into our proposal submission as hard copy accurately. For this reason, it is Impossible that the final bid value will match the proposal schedule values. By including values in the schedule, it also results in pricing information being included in the technical volume of the proposal. Typically, pricing information should be included in only the price volume of the proposal rather than the technical volume since source selection board reviewers should not be influenced by price factors until they have reviewed the technical data independently. Would the government consider eliminating the cost loading requirement and only provide the work activities on the schedule? Bidders can still provide price detail breakouts in their price proposal volume if necessary. | No | |
| 3 | RFP Factor 3 – Past Performance –requires offerors to submit PPQ’s from clients directly to the Contracting Officer. Since many federal Contracting Officer’s refuse to complete PPQ’s and tell us that they have already completed a CPAR’s, can the CPAR evaluation be submitted in lieu of the PPQ if it is an applicable federal project? We often have a difficult time getting the client to complete PPQ’s over and over again for the same project when a CPAR has already been completed and entered into the federal system since they believe this to be redundant. We also find that the client has often left their position through retirement or transfer and is no longer with the agency. | CPARS past performance evaluations may be used in lieu of the PPQ | |
| 4 | If CPARS are acceptable, may they be emailed directly to the Contracting Officer by March 11, 2021 at 4PM, or to be included as an addendum that does not count against the page requirement in the final proposal. | CPARS must be sent directly to the Contracting Officer | |
| 5 | Since the proposals are to be hand delivered in duplicate hard copy, we would like to ask if the bid due time may be changed to a time later in the day such as 4 pm EST to accommodate the hand delivered hard copies. | No | |
| 6 | Since the proposals are to be hand delivered in duplicate hard copy, we would like to ask if the bid due date may be changed to a day later in the week such as a Friday to accommodate the hand delivered hard copies. | The response opening date has been changed to April 21, 2021 | |
| 7 | Specs has references throughout regarding coordination and possibly BIM drawings. What is the extent of the BIM requirements for this project? Will complete BIM model be required showing coordination of all trades above ceiling, etc? | Yes | |
| 8 | If BIM is required, is there a Revit file or other partial BIM file form the AE design to be used for the full BIM model? | Yes. A Revit model will be provided once the contractor has signed and returned the attached | |
| 9 | The RFP section 4.16.52.236-4 states that the data provide by Terracon (i.e. Geotech report) is for the Contractor’s information and the GOV shall not be responsible for any interpretations or conclusion drawn from the data. Does this imply the Geotech report, or other appendix or additional documents are not to override the plans and specs? | The Geotech report is to be considered part of the bid documents and shall supersede specification 31 20 00. | |
| 10 | 1 00 00 1.27 requires 3rd party photo documentation of the site and of the building progress of architectural, structural and all MEP trades throughout the duration of the project. It also requires all photos be catalogued on a cloud-based system and shared with all stake holders. Can this requirement be met by daily and weekly progress photos taken by field staff and documented and catalogued on Procore, as is typical with most other projects? | yes | |
| 11 | 01 35 26 1.9.B requires a Certified Safety Professional to perform monthly safety inspections onsite. This CSP requires a 4 year college degree, and the specialized certification for a Certified Safety Professional. Can these safety inspections be performed by a corporate safety officer with 5 years construction experience and the OSHA 30? | Certified Safety Professional qualifications to be as outlined in the specifications. | |
| 12 | Is the bat survey required prior to removing any trees? | During the time from April 1 to October 1, yes. From October 1 to April 1, No. Contractor shall follow all and any recommendations/directives that the bat study states. | |
| 13 | 01 81 13 3.1 requires the following procedures at the end of construction, prior to turning the bldg. over to the Owner; replace all filters in AHU’s, perform bldg. flush out by pumping 14000 cf of outdoor air per sf of floor are while maintaining internal temp of 60 degrees and relative humidity of 60%. Is this required? | Yes. | |
| Site and Civil | |||
| 14 | During construction of the first two CLC buildings, the concern was raised that the new buildings could be built within the 100 year storm flood plain of the drainage creek behind the new bldgs. Proposed layout location. This RFI is merely a courtesy to bring it to someone’s attention if it has not already been addressed. | Per FEMA floodplain map the site is Zone "X" deemed outside of the flood hazard zone. | |
| 15 | Keynote #9 on sheet C500 denotes a new propane tank concrete pad. This pad location appears to be on top of the existing electrical building. Please confirm the location of the propane tank pad. | Propane tank has been relocated across drive at current location. The electrical building in question has been added to the plans for clarification. | |
| 16 | Where is the laydown yard for the Phase II project? It should be large enough to accommodate nearly one full building of framing, trusses etc. | Laydown yard is shown behind Building 205. | |
| 17 | A geotechnical report for this site was included with the bid documents. Is the geotechnical report for information only (FIO) or should it be considered as a bid document? If it is to be considered a bid document, does it supersede the specification section 31 20 00 and the contract drawings since these documents contain conflicting information? | The Geotech report is to be considered part of the bid documents and shall supersede specification 31 20 00. | |
| 18 | The geotechnical report indicates the shallow presence of rock in the construction limits and notes that some unweathered rock may require drilling and blasting (See bottom of page 8). It has been our experience that blasting on a VA campus is not allowed due to the potential it may have on patients who suffer from PTSD. Please confirm if drilling and blasting will be allowed for rock removal or if rock removal must be performed by mechanical methods only? | Blasting is not allowed on VA Property. | |
| 19 | Specification section 31 20 00, paragraph 2.1,B identifies the following Soil Classifications as acceptable fill materials: GW, GP, GM, SW, SP, SM, SC, and ML, or any combination of these groups; free of rock or gravel larger than 75 mm (3 inches) in any dimension, debris, waste, frozen materials, vegetation, and other deleterious matter. Material approved from on site or off-site sources having a minimum dry density of 1760 kg/m3 (110 pcf), a maximum Plasticity Index of 15, and a maximum Liquid Limit of 40. A vast majority of the materials on site tested by Terracon are CL and CH classified materials with plasticity indexes near or above 15. If following the geotechnical report, much of the on-site soils could be utilized per Terracon’s recommendations. However, the specifications as written would exclude nearly all on site material being used. We also note that CL and CH materials are the predominant soils found in this region and are commonly, successfully used in this region for fill material. If CL and CH soils cannot be utilized, then offerors would need to import large quantities of non-native materials or crushed limestone which will be a very significant expense to the project. Please confirm if we can follow the specifications with regards to suitable materials, or, if the recommendations of the geotechnical report must be followed. | The project should generate very little cut material as this is a fill site. However, Materials excavated should be allowed to be reused on site to avoid haul off or further import. The Geotech report shall supersede specification 31 20 00. | |
| 20 | The geotechnical evaluation did not show any proctors had been completed so no information regarding maximum dry density is included on the onsite fill materials. Soils in Central Kentucky generally have maximum dry density of 95-105 pcf which falls below the specification 31 20 00 requirements. Can the specification for fill material outlined in the geotechnical evaluation be used in lieu of the materials specification outlined above since the 110 pcf dry density would be hard to find within a close proximity to the project site and would likely require quarry stone be imported to the site at great expense to the project? It currently appears that the 31 20 00 specifications were downloaded from the VA Technical Information Library without being edited to account for local conditions or the geotechnical report recommendations. | Refer to geotechnical report for import material specifications. Per conversation with Geotechnical Engineer considerations for local material shall supersede standard VA specification. The standard specification has been revised to reflect compaction rate found in the geotech report. | |
| 21 | The existing access road to the project site is currently in poor condition and based on our observations does not appear to be engineered for heavy vehicles such as concrete, rock, earth moving equipment and other heavy material delivery vehicles. There does not appear to be any design in the current bid documents to re-build this road after completion of the CLC and the road will likely not be suitable for normal POV traffic by the time the work is completed. Will reconstruction of the road be done by separate contract after completion of the CLC facility? | All potholes shall be filled on the surface road. | |
| 22 | The geotechnical report indicates that the northeast corner of building 205 will likely bear on limestone bedrock while the remaining portions of the building will have footing bearing on native soils. The report indicates concern of differential settlement due to this condition and recommends either placement of expansion joints to allow for the anticipated settlement or the over excavation of footings and installation of a two-foot lift of compacted DGA below footers resting on native soils. The structural design drawings do not appear to account for this recommended over excavation. Please confirm if bidders are to include over excavation and placement of compacted DGA for the footers on building 205? | Yes, Include the overexcavation and compacted fill per the Geotechnical Report. See Drawing S001 General Note C-3. | |
| 23 | 23. | Borings and the geotechnical report indicate the presence of rock that will likely need to be removed to accommodate construction. However, there is not enough detail or boring data in the bid documents to quantify the amount of rock removal required. Furthermore, we do not note any estimated bid quantities for rock removal in the documents. Please provide the estimated quantity of rock removal that offerors should include in their bid or confirm that rock removal will be addressed by a contract modification when encountered during construction. | Assume 1,000 cubic yards for rock excavation for bidding purposes. |
| 24 | The drawing notes indicate that the owner (Department of Veterans Affairs) will provide the NPDES permit for the project. Please confirm that the owner has obtained or will obtain the NPDES permit by time of award so as not to delay the start of construction. | Contractor to obtain NPDES permit for the project. | |
| 25 | Has the owner obtained the Land Disturbance Permit (LDP) for development of this project through LFUCG (Lexington Fayette Urban County Government)? If not, has the design and engineering calculations required for the LDP been reviewed and approved by the local permit authority for compliance with the permit parameters? | Permits have not been obtained from LFUCG nor has there been a formal review process initiated. Plans will be submitted once contract has been awarded. | |
| Architectural | |||
| 26 | Sheet A402 denotes item 10.03 in the Patient Bedrooms as a Standard Patient Bed Service Wall but does not appear to provide an elevation of the headwall needed for pricing. Please provide an exact model number with detailed options and provide a details elevation of the headwall. | Basis-Of-Design: Modular Services Company - ArtWorks - Model # 6823-R: Recessed, double-sided, 3 gas |
Headwall to receive PL-1: Wilsonart, Casual Linen 4944-38 Details (13 and 14) provided on Sheet A402 in Addendum 1
| X | 27 | Notes Plan A101N shows windows labelled 35 in the Screened Porch 115. This window 35 cannot be located on the plans please provide an elevation. | Sidelight width indicated on revised sheet A 601 frame type 3. |
| 28 | It appears the notes 7.55 Downspouts and 7.54 Gutter on sheet A115 Roof Plan are switched in the note’s legend. The note 7.55 appears to be pointing to the gutter and 7.54 appears to be pointing to the downspouts. Please confirm. | Notes are correct. 7.55 indicates locations where a downspout is located along the gutter. | |
| 29 | It appears the notes 7.24 and 7.25 have an error at the membrane roofing. Each location of membrane roofing has a double note 7.24, it appears it should be 7.24 for the roof membrane and 7.25 for the tapered insulation. Please confirm. | Each location requires the roof membrane as well as tapered insulation. | |
| 30 | Elevation 1/A201 shows a dotted line on Bldg 205 denoting a 6’x5 removable panel in the gable above door 130B. However, this removable panel shown on the Attic Plan on sheet A114 in Bldg 205 denoted by keynote 8.35 appears to be 30’ long. Which is correct, the 30’ removable panel or the 6’x5’ removable panel. | Provide 6x5 removable panel as indicated on the elevation. | |
| 31 | There does not appear to be a section of the screened porch showing enough detail to properly takeoff the aluminum screen and frame. Please provide a detail of this condition. | See sheets A201 and A202 for elevtions of screen porch. See 5/A312 for a wall section through screen. | |
| 32 | There does not appear to be any auto-operators used on this project. That seems unusual considering this is a facility for handicapper individuals. Are the auto-operators missing by design, or should they be included? | Low energy power assist door operators to be provided at doors. See addendum. | |
| 33 | There does not appear to be a room finish schedule showing the finishes for walls, ceilings, etc for each individual room, there is only a finish legend on sheet IF110. Can this Room Finish Schedule be provided? | Finish information is located on finish plans. |
Refer to sheets IF110 (Ground Floor - Finish Plans), IF111 (Floor Finish Plan), IF112 (Wall Finish Plan), IF113 (Wall Protection Plan)
| 34 | There appear to be two different gypsum ceiling hatches shown on RCP sheets A123 and A124. One is noted as 9.28 suspended gypsum ceiling, but the other is not noted. What does this lighter gypsum ceiling hatch represent in the following rooms? | |
| a. 118, 118B, 118C Bldg 204 | Gypsum board attached to bottom of trusses, painted P-8 | |
| b. 111 Bldg 204 | Gypsum board attached to bottom of trusses, painted P-8 | |
| c. 129 Bldg 204 | Gypsum board attached to bottom of trusses, painted P-8 | |
| d. 115 Bldg 205 | Gypsum board attached to bottom of trusses | |
| e. 130 Bldg 205 | Gypsum board attached to bottom of trusses, painted P-8 | |
| 35 | Rooms 105 and 106 in Bldg 204 and Rooms 110 and 109 in Bldg 205 shown on RCP sheet A124 appears to show two sets of patient lift track and motors leading from the patient room into the patient restroom. Is this correct? | The barriatric lifts have a double track configuration. Coordinate final configuration and location with VA patient lift installer. |
| 36 | There does not appear to be a footing detail for the dumpster enclosure wall post or gate posts. Please provide. | Will provide. See drawings per addendum. |
| 37 | What size and material are the dumpster enclosure wall posts? | Provide manufacturers standard posts. Basis of design is 7x7" nominal, aluminum posts for enclosure. |
| 38 | What size are the dumpster enclosure gate posts? | Provide manufacturers standard posts. Basis of design is5" (diameter) steel, round posts for the gate. |
| 39 | Note 11.09 on sheet A313 denotes the gate posts as aluminum, is that correct? | No. 1/2" stainless steel pins with adjustible hardware. |
| 40 | Dumpster Enclosure Wall Panels: Please provide a detail/section to answer the following questions. | |
| f. How is the wall panel frame at the dumpster enclosure constructed? | Frame is screwed to the posts prior to inserting panels. | |
| g. What size and material are the wall panel frame members? | Extruded Aluminum 1.5 x 3.13" | |
| h. Is a cross brace member required at the inside face of the wall panel to provide rigidity? | No. Wall does not exceed 8' in height. | |
| i. How do the wood grain textured PVC planks secure into the wall panel frame? | Frame is installed to posts and then planks slide into grooves of bottom rail then can be stacked with spacers in between planks. Top rail is then installed (groove fitting over last plank). | |
| j. How do the wall panels attach to the enclosure posts? | Frame is fastened to posts before panels are inserted and top rail is installed to the post. | |
| 41 | Dumpster Enclosure Gate: Please provide a detail/section to answer the following questions. | |
| k. How is the gate frame at the dumpster enclosure constructed? | Same as panel walls but hung using hinges attached to the steel gate posts. | |
| l. What size and material are the gate frame members? | 2 x 3.125" steel rails. | |
| m. Is a cross brace member required at the inside face of the gate frame to provide rigidity? | No | |
| n. How do the wood grain textured PVC planks secure into the gate frame? | Like the wall panels, the planks and spacers will be inserted into the bottom rail and then stacked to the top before installing the top rail. | |
| o. How do the gate frames attach to the gate posts? | Hinges will be bolted in. | |
| 42 | There does not appear to be a spec or a basis of design for the wood grain PVC wall panels at the dumpster enclosure walls and gate, please provide. | BOD is Cityscapes' 13' x 13' Standard Plankwall (horizontal plank) system with ToughGate (Mission) gate system. All posts to be burried. Finish to be white posts and frames with horizontal planks to match building siding color. |
| 43 | There does not appear to be a section of the canopy showing the materials used at the fascia, and the ceiling. | Detail will be provided via addendum. |
| 44 | According to the Building section 3/A301 notes 6.55 the entire 1st Floor at the Roof Truss bottom chord is to receive a gypsum fire barrier. All 1st Floor details on sheet 311 only show a single layer of 5/8” type-x gypsum board, 7/8” resilient channel and vapor barrier, however, the Building Section 1/A405 appears to show 2 layers of 5/8” type-x gypsum board at the Roof Truss bottom chord. Which is correct, a fire barrier at the Roof Truss bottom chord with one or two layers of gypsum board? | Section 3/A301 is drawn with two layers of gyp. |
| 45 | According to the Building section 3/A301 note 6.49 the entire Ground Floor at the floor truss bottom is to receive a gypsum fire barrier. Building Section 1/A311 appears to show 2 layers of 5/8” type-x gypsum board at the floor truss but is only noted as 1 layer. However, Building Section 4/A312 calls out 2 layers of gypsum board at the floor truss. Which is correct, a fire barrier at the floor Truss bottom chord with one or two layers of gypsum board? | 2 layers of gypsum board are required. See UL assembly BXUV.L547. |
| 46 | Neither the Ground Floor nor the 1st Floor RCP appear to show any ceiling access panels in the hard ceilings. Are there any access panels in these hard ceilings? If so, please provide a drawing with the proposed locations and quantities. | See the updated ceiling plans for panel locations. |
| 47 | Please provide elevations showing and denoting the varies wall protection assemblies. | Refer to elevation detail "Typical Rigid Wall Protection (RWP-1) Elevation" on Sheet IF110 |
| 48 | It appears that all of the wall base is either rubber base, integral WSF cove or tile base. Other than the small amount of wood trim at the stair landing, is there other wood trim such as; wood base, wood chair rail, wood crown molding or any other wood trim inside the buildings? | No. |
| 49 | Detail 2b/A311 denotes ice and water shield at 36” up the roof from the gutter. Is this the only location to receive ice shield or does it get installed at valleys, around all penetrations, etc? | Install ice and water sheild at all valleys and around all penetrations. |
| 50 | Detail 5b/A312 denotes membrane roof while detail 5adenotes EPDM roof. Is the roof membrane EPDM on all sections of flat roof or does the membrane vary? | All flat roof membrane is EPDM. |
| 51 | The plans instruct the bidders to use dimensions provided and not to scale the plans, however, dimensions are lacking on all casework details and sections, and elevations on sheet A511. Please provide dimensions to avoid scaling the drawings. | Heights and depths of casework are indicated on sheet A511. Lengths of casework are indicated on sheets A401, A402, A403, and A404. |
| 52 | Section 10 26 00 Wall protection: Finish schedule and interior elevations state the FPW-1 are 5’ height and FWP-2 are full height, whereas the wall protection plans has them vice versa. Please clarify. | The description of height listed in Finish Legend Comments is correct. FWP-1 should be a 5' Wainscot. FWP-2 should be Full Height Installation. Drawings will reflect this correctly in Addendum. |
| 53 | Section 10 14 00 Signage: Rooms 129 and 133 do not have signage shown, is it needed? If so, which sign does each need? | Both rooms, 129 and 133, should receive sign type C. Drawings will reflect this correctly in Addendum. |
| 54 | Section 10 21 23 Curtain and Track: The specs call for material called “The Grabber” which is only provided by the manufacturer “On The Right Track”, is this spec closed to only them or are others approved which would use a different system of attaching the curtain to the track? | The Lexington VA solely uses "On The Right Track" |
| 55 | The curtain and track as shown in the Bathing Suites 121 in Bldg 204 and 126 in Bldg 205 are shown in the enlarged plan B/A401 as running parallel to the spa tub. However, the track is only shown as about 3’ long right next to the spa tub. It is assumed this curtain and track needs to close in a manner to enclose the spa tub. Please provide a revised B/A401 showing the actual length of the new curtain and track within the bathing suites. | Refer to RCP on sheet A124 (RCP - First Floor) as part of Addendum. |
| 56 | The spec section 10 11 13 Chalkboard is provided but markerboards cannot be located on the plans. Please clarify where these are on the plans and in what quantity. | There are no whiteboards. Specification 10 11 13 to be removed. |
| 57 | The spec section 10 31 00 Manufactured Electric Fireplaces calls for a rear width of 26”. However, we have only been able to identify fireplaces matching all other requirements in the specs with a 36” rear width. Is this 36” rear width acceptable in lieu of the 26”? | Yes, 36" is acceptable. |
| 58 | Please confirm owner’s existing SFIC key system | Best 7-pin lock system |
| 59 | Is it possible to get a basis-of-design for wood clad door elevation “FG” used for openings #’s 000A,000B in building #205? | Masonite 4 Lite (1/2) over 2 Panel Durastyle- Artisan. |
| 60 | Sheet G001 General Construction Notes Items 8 and note C on sheet A100 call for wood blocking to be fire retardant. Please confirm that Fire Retardant Wood Blocking is required in all walls, even no rated wall assemblies. | Correct. No fire retardant wood blocking is required. |
| 61 | Note #14 on sheet G001 General Construction calls for the contractor to provide a map indicating the location of all fuel powered equipment. Does this pertain to POV and delivery trucks? Most fuel powered equipment is mobile and will be moved to several locations within the site boundaries. (portable generators, earthmoving equipment, paving equipment, forklifts, boom lifts etc.) How do does this equipment get represented on a “map”? | This note applies to installed equipment for this project, i.e. diesel powered generator and hot water heaters, etc. |
| 62 | Just outside the back door of the connector between Bldgs 204 and 205 is what appears to be a fence. Sheet A101D shows a fence 18’ 5 143/256” x 13 – 10 31/32 with a door/gate. There does not appear to be any notes calling out what this fence is. Detail 17/C002 shows a Decorative Black Wrought Iron Fence. Is this black wrought iron fence the fence and gate depicted at the back door of the bldg. connector? | Correct. Bidders shall include a price for aluminum fencing as an alternative to black wrought iron. A revised detail for decorative fencing will be provided via addendum. |
| 63 | Is gate to this fence to be lockable and if so, is this to be on the same keying system as the interior doors? | Yes |
| 64 | If the iron fence form 17/C002 is the fence shown on sheet A101D, please provide an elevation of the gate. | Provide manufacturedrs standard lockable gate with a 3'-6" clear width to match adjacent fencing system. |
| 65 | Is this wrought iron gate an actual wrought iron fence or should it be an aluminum fence which is made to look like the wrought iron? The aluminum fencing is much less expensive than the wrought iron. | Provide aluminum fence made to look like wrought iron. |
| 66 | If the fence is aluminum prefab fence system, please provide a Basis of Design. | Ameristar Fence Montage Majestic. Color to be black. |
| 67 | A114 Note 6.50 calls for 1x6 curb at floor. Is this the same as a “toe board”? | yes |
| 68 | A114 Note 9.47 Gypsum Board Ceiling at Bottom Rafter. Install R-36 Batt insulation above Gypsum Board and Rafter Baffles at roof deck. R-36 insulation is +/- 12” thick. Does top cord of rafter need to be deep enough to accommodate insulation/baffles, or can rafter cord be “furred” in locations that receive the R-36 Batt insulation? | top truss cord may be furred if needed to fit R-36 batt insulation and baffle. |
| Structural | ||
| 69 | S101 shows a beam for the operable partition per detail 2/A123. What size is this beam? | Beam Size Is W 8x18 -Detail cut through beam at exterior wall is missing. |
| 70 | S003 typical non-load bearing stud walls detail calls for 16 ga deflection track. A001 Wall Types – Interior do not indicate 16 ga deflection track is to be used. Is 16 ga deflection track required per structural drawings? | Yes. |
| 71 | Sheet 201 – Section 14: This detail reflects a Grade Beam Schedule for GB1 to GB8. Note 1 shows that grades beams will be 24”x24” and references to “See Plan” and Sections 8 & 14. The foundation plan S100 does not have any specific tags for grade beams GB1 to GB8 which will add additional reinforcement beyond Sections 8 & 14 and Sections 1, 2 & 3 on S201. Please confirm that all the steel reinforcing required for grade beams are reflected in Sections 1,2 &3 on S201? If not, will sheet S100 be adjusted to include GB tags for top and bottom steel reinforcing in addition to #4 stirrups at 16” OC per Section 14/201. | Refer to S101 - Level 2 Floor Framing Plan for Grade Beam Marks |
| 72 | Sheet S101 – Detail 2: This Level 2 Floor Framing Plan shows a transition from Slab on Grade Floor / Foundation wall to wood framing system with 2” topping slab. This transition of foundation systems to be constructed at different times is primarily at column line 11 which crosses Corridors 100A and 100C plus Special Care Bedroom 110. The flooring for these rooms is LVT. Will any expansion joint system will be required (Section 8/S201) between the concrete system and wood frame system due to differential movement? | No expansion joint, 2" topping slabs are to be doweled to wall as typically shown in Section 7/S201, see sections 3/S301 and 4/S301 for dowels and wood framing. |
| 73 | There does not appear to be any header labels identified at the headers on the framing plans. Please provide a plan with the labelled header beams and LVL’s. | Headers are scheduled on S004 and selected by span. |
| Mechanical | ||
| 74 | Is it acceptable to use groove fittings for steel hydronic piping for 2-1/2” and larger diameter piping? | No. |
| 75 | According to our Mech Sub the spec section 23 10 00 typically refers more to UG fuel/oil tanks, piping, and leak detection systems. This project appears to need a more accurate spec dealing with the UG natural gas lines, and propane lines. | Refer to specification section 23 11 23 for natural gas piping. |
| 76 | According to our Mech Sub, the propane tanks are typically only handled between propane provider such as Ferrell Gas, and the Owner. Ferrell would not quote the contract to furnish and install the tank and fill with propane. The contract will provide all piping and concrete pads necessary for the propane tank. Therefore, we request that it be made clear by RFI response that the propane tank is NIC, but all piping, concrete pad, etc. is. | Propane tank will be coordinated between VA and supplier. Contractor shall provide all piping, valves, accessories, etc. from propane tank into building serving equipment. |
| 77 | The hydronic pump schedule on sheet M601 references pumps P-6, P-7, and P-8 but these pumps cannot be located on the plans. Where are they located? | Pumps P-6, P-7 and P-8 are AHU Preheat Coil Pumps. They are not shown on the floor plans. Refer to 'Preheat Coil (Hot Water) - Piping Connections' detail on sheet M502. |
| 78 | Detail A/P501 shows a trap primer piping. The specs 22 13 00 2.8 references trap primer TP-1. Are these trap primers required, if so, where are they located on the plans? | Trap primers are required per the the Drain Schedule on sheet P601. |
| 79 | There does not appear to be a schematic drawing showing the detailed connections to the hot water and cooling coils in the AHU-204, 205-1 and 205-G. Please provide. | Preheat Coil (Hot Water) - Piping Connections' detail is on sheet M502. The Cooling Coil is DX and the piping connections will be manufacturer specific. |
| 80 | The Elevator Machine room and Elevator Shaft are separated by Biomed 004. What is the proposed routing of the hydraulic lines from the machine room to elevator shaft? | Hydraulic lines may be run below slab or run ovehead to elevator shaft. Contractor to coordinate all code requirements and clearances with other building utilities for pathway selected. |
| 81 | MP100 shows condensate for AC-1 located in biomed 004 discharging into floor drain of the Elevator Machine Room 003. PP100 Note 5 Elevator machine room states no piping. Is the condensate piping allowed in Elevator Machine Room because AC-1 serves the Elevator Machine Room? | Yes, the condensate piping is allowed in Elevator Machine Room because AC-1 serves the Elevator Machine Room |
| Electrical | ||
| 82 | How many data cables at in the floor box locations? | Per legend, numberal in double square indicates #of data jacks. |
| 83 | Is the 3 Cell (maxcell) referred to in note 1 and 2 on sheet ET002 mesh innerduct? | Yes |
| 84 | The Technology OSP Riser on sheet ET001 shows an outdoor innerduct. Is this referring to the hard plastic (orange innerduct? | The design intent is the fabric, multi-cell innerduct. |
| 85 | ES101 Note 5 calls for a fence around the generator. Can an Architectural detail be provided to show the details of this fence (height/type/gate/ect)? | A 6' chain link fence is required. A manufacturers standard gate wide enough to allow the largest piece of equipment is to be provided. |
| 86 | ES101 Note 10 PIV. Is there to be a tamper switch installed on the PIV to be monitored by the FA system? | Yes, a tamper switch is to be included. |
| Security | ||
| 87 | Can Lenel S2 be considered an acceptable manufacturer for Division 28 Physical Access Controls | Campus standard is SoftwareHouse Ccure 9000 |
| 88 | Can Milestone XProtect be considered an acceptable manufacturer for Division 28 Video Surveillance | Campus Standard is Tyco Victor |
Advon
| Advon | ||
| Administrative and General: | ||
| RFI # | RFI | RFI Response |
| 1 | Please find the below questions relating to Sub-Factor 1a – Relevant Experience for the subject project. Please let us know as soon as possible so that we can make a determination as to whether we will be able to pursue this project. Thank you for your consideration. |
1. Will the Government consider a renovation project of a Community Living Center with a value greater than $5 million as relevant for Sub-Factor 1a – Relevant Experience?
| 2. Will the Government consider a Community Living Center construction project that is 70% Experience? | 1. The government will consider a renovation of a Community Living Center valued at greater than 5Million. 2. The government will not consider projects that are not 95% or more completion | ||
| 2 | Factor 1, Subfactor 1a – Relevant Experience |
1. Would renovation of a hospital/medical center and/or healthcare facility be considered relevant?
2. Would you consider projects that are 75% complete relevant? 1. The government will not consider a renovation of a Community Living Center valued at greater than 5Million. 2. The government will not consider projects that are not 95% or more completion
Povolny Group
Povolny Group
| RFI # | RFI | RFI Response |
| 1 | The Electrical Resistivity Cross-Section labeled as Line 5 W-E in the Geotechnical Engineering Report from Terracon highlights one potential karst anomaly. However, the corresponding Line in the Exploration Plan appears to indicate the presence of two anomalies. Please clarify if the large blue/purple area in the cross-section of Line 5 should be highlighted too, or if the second (westernmost) mark in the same line of the exploration plan be removed as a potential karst anomaly. | See the attached supplement to the Geotechnical Engineering Report. The updated cross-section for Line 5 includes the outline of the second anomaly indicated in the report’s Exploration Plan. The addition of the outline for this second anomaly for Line 5 does not alter the recommendations provided in the original geotechnical report. |
| 2 | Good afternoon. The Geotechnical Report from Terracon indicates that, at the time of their work, they were not provided with evidence/documentation that the recently-placed fill has been placed and compacted properly. Please refer to the first three paragraphs under “Geotechnical Overview” (Page 7 and 8 of Terracon’s Geotechnical Report). We are particularly interested in such documentation for the areas of the new south building that will bear on, within, or just above this fill. Please provide these reports, that are necessary for an accurate pricing of the work. | See the attached supplement to the Geotechnical Engineering Report. The contractor shall utilize information in the supplemental report provided and draw their own conclusions. |
Valiant
Valiant
| RFI # | RFI | RFI Response | ||
| 1 | Will the VA accept the use of the industry leading Procore Project Management software as the primary submittal and data tracking tool for this project? | Yes. ProCore will be acceptable. | ||
| 2 | As a result of the effect of COVID-19 throughout the U.S., and the resulting Federal, State and local governments’ responses / | |||
| requirements of safe distancing and potential advocations of working remotely and/or complete organization closures, please advise how the Government intends to address delays resulting there as it pertains to the current solicitation schedule for this and all future projects. | The government will address delays as they arise, and will not make a blanket statement about delays on projects. | |||
| 3 | As there will be no in-person bid opeing for this project, can the CO or COR provide a conference line number to call into, so bidders can listen to the bid opening? This has been done in other VISNs and has worked well. | This project is being procured via FAR 15 as a Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection. There is no public bid opening that will occur. | ||
| 4 | Can we submit our bid via email, if we mail the original hardcopy Bid Bond prior to the due date? | Bid bonds may be sent electronically, however the original bonds must be submitted to the receiving office before or by the due date. | ||
| 5 | Is this project tax exempt, and will the CO/COR provide the necessary tax exempt certificates | No this is not a tax exempt project. The contractor's final price proposal shall be inclusive of all sales taxes. | ||
| 6 | The Contracting Officer will then NTP to the awardee after the contract award is made. What is the approximent duration between issuing the award and issuing the NTP? | The NTP will be issued within 30 days from actual award, | ||
| 7 | For planning the preliminary project schedule, can you pelase provide an anticipated award date? | The anticipated award date will be on or by May 30, 2021 | ||
| 8 | What is the anticipated duration between issuance of contract award and issuance of the NTP? | See the response from question #6 above | ||
| 9 | Contractor feels this project warrants a Senior Project Manager. This is not a position noted in the solicitation for Proposal. Can our Senior Project Manager be added to the project organization portion of the proposal? | Contractor has the right to staff the project as they deem justified as long as the specification minimums ae being met | ||
| 10 | Contractor feels this project warrants a QA/QC Super. This is not a position noted in the solicitation for Proposal. Can a QA/QC Super requrement be added to the required staffing plan? | Contractor has the right to staff the project as they deem justified as long as the specification minimums ae being met | ||
| 11 | How many calendar days should be included in the critical-path method schedule for VA and A/E review and respond to RFIs? | 10 calendar days | ||
| 12 | How many calendar days should be included in the critical-path method schedule for VA and A/E submittal review? | 15 calendar days | ||
| 13 | Provide 3-D REVIT Design model in native file format, for creation of coordination documentations. | A Revit model will be made available. An electronic file release form has been included which to be signed by the contractor and returned prior to the release of model. | ||
| 14 | Will the VA provide the contract drawings in the native Revit format for use by the GC? | A Revit model will be made available. An electronic file release form has been included which to be signed by the contractor and returned prior to the release of model. | ||
| 15 | Will VA require GC’s to develop and submit coordination drawings in Revit? | yes | ||
| 16 | Where will the designated parking & laydown area be for workers accessing the construction site? | yes - Laydown yard is shown behind Building 205. | ||
| 17 | Please confirm that the project is to be completed during normal working hours, not nights and weekends. | The contractor shall review the General Requirements Specification section 01 10 00 for the medical center's normal operating hours. Any work specified outside normal operating hours shall be coordinated with the project COR. | ||
| 18 | The contract includes liquidated damages. If the VA temporarily shuts down or suspends the project, will extended general conditions cost and time be added to the contract? | There shall be no liquidated damages in this contract. LD will be removed in the addendum. | ||
| 19 | Please confirm that only the Contracting Officer can suspend work via written notification to the Contractor. | Roxie | ||
| 20 | Provide product data, vendor drawings, approved shop drawings, owners, vendor contact information for any owner furnished equipment. | The VA will supply this information during the construction process. | ||
| 21 | Confirm bid date and time and location - there was conflictiong information on solicitation. | The solicitation is clear on the response date for offers. This is not a seal bid, thus no public bid opening will occur. | ||
| 22 | Has owner entered into agreement with owner contracted equipment? | Some, but not all | ||
| 23 | Propane system - The site drawings show a concrete pad where the tank would go and the piping going into the building - This is assumed to be for back up fuel for the boilers. This spec is more for UG Fuel oil tanks, piping, leak detection systems, etc. Typically propane is a service/system that is set up by the owner direct on the back end. Please confirm you intention so that we can price this system accordingly. | Propane tank will be coordinated between VA and supplier. Contractor shall provide all piping, valves, accessories, etc. from propane tank into building serving equipment. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .