586-26-102 Pre-bid RFIs_Responses.docx

586-26-10 Roof Warehouse & Mental Health Modular | RFI’s

1. Could you clarify which ½” coverboard would be suitable for us to use to recover the warehouse roof? (Glass mat gypsum, Gypsum fiber, High-density polyiso)

Rigid-roof insulation cover board composed of a high-density closed-cell polyisocyanurate foam core bonded on each side to glass-reinforced felt (GRF).

2. Should we include as optional metal conductor heads and downspouts for the Modular Building in our quote?

Yes

3. Are there any specific constraints or challenges identified in accessing or renovating Building 9 (e.g., locked mental health units)?

No

4. Are there specific badging or clearance requirements for subcontractor personnel entering the VA premises?

No, as all work will be on the exterior of buildings.

5. Could you please confirm the core details of the modular and mental health building?

We have not cored the existing roofs and each contractor may or may not elect to core for use in bidding.

6. What’s the wind uplifts you require of both buildings?

The latest edition of the International Building Code is the 2024 version. This edition includes numerous updates and improvements, such as enhanced provisions for wind, earthquake, and snow loads, new requirements for tornado loadings, and updated guidelines for fire-resistance-rated construction.

7. What is the preferred R- Value you require on the modular Building?

8. What type of material do you require on the coping i.e. galvanize or aluminum?

All roof related sheet metal flashing and trim will be shop fabricated with 24 gauge galvanized Kynar coated metal.

9. Will a retrofit drain be accepted for drain replacement?

Yes

10. Please publicly post a copy of the Asbestos Report mentioned the SOW document.

The third sentence in the scope of work states: “The Assessment can be reviewed during normal business hours by contacting the Facility Safety Section at ext. 51528 or 51329.” A copy of the referenced report is attached for review by contractors.

11. Please provide a copy of the As-built drawings for the existing roofs.

We do not have existing roof as built drawings.

12. Confirm this project falls under the Specialty Trades category of the Limitations on Subcontracting requirements.

Specialty Trades is correct.

13. Specs call for substrate board, is this required?

Yes, Cover Board and then tapered insulation with crickets to provide positive drainage to roof drains.

14. Specs call for vapor barrier of 2 plies of asphalt felts is hot asphalt? Is this required?

No this is not required.

15. Specs are not clear on types and thickness of metals to be used for copings and edge metals, please advise on type and thickness.

See response Number 8 above.

16. Please clarify “metal guard” around perimeter, is this to mean hand railing system or coping system on parapets?

Coping System on Parapets.

17. Are retrofit roof drains acceptable in lieu of total replacement of roof drains?

Yes

18. Please clarify yellow setback line per OSHA code and yellow safety perimeter lines, are these the same thing?

Yes, same thing.

19. Is the lightning protection to be recertified?

No, just reinstalled properly.

20. Under the LPTA framework, please detail how Technical Evaluation will rate or score the SubFactors. Will it be a points system or pass/fail for each metric?

Pass/Fail

21. With respect to Source Selection the solicitation language conflicts itself. On page 12 of 64, "Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors." and "Award will be made to the responsible, lowest price technically acceptable offeror that meets or exceeds the acceptability standards for all non-cost factors." Contrarily page 14 of 64 states, "Performance history, while rated "Neutral" in Past Performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and thus, may be an unsuccessful offer when compared to the proposal of other offerors." 'Most advantageous' should not be a past performance factor and cause for rejection. First, because non-cost factors are either Acceptable or Non-Acceptable and more or less advantageous should not be considered. Secondly, if No Past Performance equals a Neutral rating, the current solicitation language violates FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), a neutral evaluation is not to be treated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and thus cannot be eliminated from award if their price is lowest. Please clarify the solicitation language by removing the conflicting language on past performance.

A neutral past performance rating will not eliminate an offeror. Most advantageous is not an evaluation factor.

image1.png