The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Project #502-21-118 Replace Roof and Windows of Bldg. 4 – RFI Register
RFP 36C25625R0067
| 1. Please clarify if a superintendent can be a dual hat to cover the requirements of SSHO? |
| Serving dual role as the SSHO is acceptable |
| 2. If no to the question above, will the SSHO need to be full-time for this project? |
| See above response to #1 |
| 3. Please clarify if a superintendent can be a dual hat to cover the requirements of QA/QC? |
| Dual role is acceptable |
| 4. If no to the question above, will the QA/QC need to be full time for this project? |
| See above response to #3 |
| 5. Can a superintendent be a triple hat to cover the requirements of SSHO and QA/QC? |
| No |
| 6. Please confirm the issued drawing set is the latest and complete set. |
| Confirmed and a set of bid drawings will be provided to the prime. |
| 7. Please confirm the current design documents meet current VA TIL guidelines |
| Confirmed. |
| 8. Please provide the latest wage determination for this project’s county |
| The RFP includes the most recent version. |
WD LA 20250051 02282025 Mod 1
| 9. Is the use of temporary plastic wall panels (such as STARC panels) acceptable? |
| STARC Panels system would be acceptable. |
| 10. Who is responsible for the terminal clean of the project area? |
| Contractor is responsible for all project required cleaning. |
11. Who is responsible for contracting the commissioning agent?
No expectation for commissioning as the result of contract award.
| 12. Please confirm order of precedence for the contract documents. Does SOW prevail over the specifications and construction drawings |
| The SOW gives a general overview of the project scope requirements. |
As such, the order of precedence is (1) Specs and (2) Drawings.
Note: order of precedence doesn’t remove the responsibility of the contractor to verify existing conditions and/or discrepancies between specifications and drawings.
| 13. For planning the preliminary project schedule, please provide the anticipated NTP date. This will assist the VA in comparing the schedules provided by all bidders |
| The RFP reflects 06/16/2025 and will remain unchanged. |
| 14. Does the VA require that the bid bond/bid guarantee/SF24 be physically mailed to them or is a scanned and inserted-in-proposal-response version acceptable? |
| The RFP reflects: |
Proposal Due Date: Proposals and Bid Bonds are due NLT the date/time shown in Block 13a of Standard Form (SF) 1442. All proposals will be submitted by E-Mail (all volumes & a copy of the Bid Bond) and received NLT date/time shown in Block 13A:
NOTE: Bid Bond signatures should be wet signed and there should be no white out corrections. Impressions from Notary must be clearly visible.
| 15. What amount of bid bond/bid guarantee/SF24 does the VA require for this solicitation (the percent amount/minimum amount was missing from FAR 52.228-1)? |
| 20% or $3M. |
| 16. Does the cover page count towards any of the Price or Technical proposal page limits? |
| No |
17. Does the Table of Contents count towards any of the Price or Technical proposal page limits?
No
18. Does the offer letter count towards any of the Price or Technical proposal page limits?
Unclear of the intent of this question. A commitment letter is required per subfactor 2a criteria and would be counted towards this technical factor.
A signed 1442 will apply to factor 4.
| 19. Do any of the returned FAR or VAAR clauses count towards the Price or Technical proposal page limits? |
| No – please submit this administrative information with Factor 4. |
| 20. Do TAB pages count towards the Price or Technical proposal page limits? |
| No |
| 21. Can Calibri or other similar fonts be used in place of Arial for the proposal font? |
| Yes |
| 22. Does the 11-point font-size-minimum requirement apply to tables, images, and graphics? |
| No |
| 23. FAR 52.204-8 is included within the RFQ but is not specifically requested to be signed and returned, would the VA like this completed and returned? If so, does the VA want it returned in the Price or Technical proposal? |
| Please return the completed provision with Factor 4. |
| 24. FAR 52.204-24 is included within the RFQ but is not specifically requested to be signed and returned, would the VA like this completed and returned? If so, does the VA want it returned in the Price or Technical proposal? |
| Please return the completed provision with Factor 4. |
| 25. FAR 52.209-7 is included within the RFQ but is not specifically requested to be signed and returned, would the VA like this completed and returned? If so, does the VA want it returned in the Price or Technical proposal? |
| Please return the completed provision with Factor 4. |
| 26. FAR 52.209-13 is included within the RFQ but is not specifically requested to be signed and returned, would the VA like this completed and returned? If so, does the VA want it returned in the Price or Technical proposal? |
| Please return the completed provision with Factor 4. |
| 27. FAR 52.219-28 is included within the RFQ but is not specifically requested to be signed and returned, would the VA like this completed and returned? If so, does the VA want it returned in the Price or Technical proposal? |
| Please return the completed clause with Factor 4. |
| 28. FAR 52.225-9 is included within the RFQ but is not specifically requested to be signed and returned, would the VA like this completed and returned? If so, does the VA want it returned in the Price or Technical proposal? |
| Please return the completed clause with Factor 4. |
| 29. Past Performance: If we have a previously completed PPQ, requested for another opportunity, or an available CPARS, can we use it within our proposal in lieu of requesting new PPQs using the document that was provided with this solicitation? |
| Yes |
| 30. Do the EMR (Contractor Evaluation Form)/OSHA 300/OSHA300A forms count towards the page count limits? |
| No |
31. Do any of the requested Exhibit forms count towards the page count limits?
Yes – See subfactor 2b and Factor 3.
| 32. Does the schedule count towards any of the page count limits? |
| Yes |
| 33. Page 11 of the RFQ document states “page limits are for single sheets of paper and may be double-sided.” Since this is an emailed PDF submission, and not a print submission, are we to assume that the Page Limitation counts can be doubled? 30 single-sided pages for Factor I, 20 single-sided pages for Factor 2, and 20 single-sided pages for Factor 3? |
| Each single PDF page is counted as one page unless otherwise authorized. |
| 34. Is there a hazardous material survey report that was completed on Building 4 for lead, asbestos, etc.? If so, will this report be included with the solicitation documents? |
| See attached hazardous material survey. |
| 35. The demolition keynotes at the tile roof state to “repair and replace all damaged portions of the deck and supporting elements” after removing the tile roof. Please provide a percentage and/ or square footage amount of deck replacement that should be included in the bid to cover this unforeseen condition. Using a definite quantity will have contractors bidding the same amount so bids are consistent. |
| Contractor shall include 1,024 square feet of deck replacement. |
| 36. The demolition keynotes at the tile roof state to “salvage all unbroken clay roof tiles for reuse.” If these tiles are original to the 1929 construction, it is recommended to replace the roofing tiles completely. Please confirm that the intent is to provide all new roofing tiles. |
| The intent is to provide all new roofing tiles |
| 37. Design – how was slope achieved on the structure? Is it in the deck of the building or tapered insulation system? |
| Tapered insulation |
| 38. What offices are occupying the top two floors? We want to ensure that use of a crane, if needed, is allowed and have encountered issues with this in past projects. |
| The floor immediately beneath the roof is a working kitchen. Crane could be scheduled for non-working hours. |
| 39. What are the historical restrictions and is there a local entity that we will have to work with as historical questions come up? |
| The State Louisiana Office for Historic Preservation has approved the clay tile shingles and windows for replacement. SHPO stated no objection to proposed action. If question arise pertaining to the construction materials, the A/E can work with the State Historic Preservation contact for guidance as we obtained the initial letter of no objection. |
| 40. On a current project at the same installation there is no weekend or after hours work allowed at all no matter how far in advance we request it. Will this internal policy be continued for this work as well? |
| Weekend or after-hours work will be adjusted to accommodate the work required. |
41. Exhibit A halfway down first page it states “Offeror can provide a CPARs with proposal however questionnaire has more detailed questions” Please confirm we must do PPQ for each project even if we have CPAR available.
The intent of Exhibit A is to standardize the format for Factor 3. To substantiate each offeror's submission, we request a completed Exhibit B from an end user. If Exhibit B is not received, the offeror will not be penalized.
Contracting will generate CPARs at the time of evaluation, so they do not need to be provided. However, if there are CPARs that you believe would benefit your firm and can still adhere to the page limitations, please include them.
| 42. Amendment 1 shows only two people signed in and one was the Contracting Officer. Is there another page with more names? |
| No. |
| 43. Expected notice of award 120 days after the Bid due date of May 1, 2025. Please confirm. |
| Offers are requested to be valid for 120 calendar days from proposal submission date. |
| 44. Expected notice to proceed, 30 days after the notice of award date. Please confirm. |
| TBD. |
For proposal submission – see answer #13.
| 45. The scope of work asks to verify electrical circuits conditions, and upgrade as needed. Do we know the scope of the upgrade based on any recent site visits? The scope of work asks to provide electrical connections for attic lighting/fan, and window A/Cs and mini-split at elevator room. It there sufficient power is available to feed these new installations? We don’t see any major power upgrades. |
| No. There is sufficient power available. |
| 46. The SOW document calls for repair stucco on east/west walls, repaint full exterior. Repair caused by roof scupper leaks, however, the drawings include pressure washing prior to painting. Is the pressure washing in the scope? |
| General Demolition Note Q on Sheet G-201 calls for the pressure washing of the building exterior. The pressure washing is within scope of this project. |
| 47. The specs call for the kitchen to remain in service during the construction. What services (gas, power, ventilation, etc.) is expected from the Contractor to provide to maintain the kitchen operable during the construction? |
| The goal is to replace the windows from the outside. No service interruptions should be necessary. |
| 48. What is the notice requirement for demolition and prep and what is the notice requirement for replacement work? |
| 2 weeks |
| 49. The specs call for lead-based paint removal at window/trim/stucco demolition. The SOW/drawings do not appear to call for it. Is the scope included? |
| General Demolition Note P on sheet G-201 states the wood molding has lead paint which is to be removed to conform to the specifications. This is in scope. |
| 50. The specs call for interior wall/soffit repairs that must receive cold-formed metal framing. Such is not included in the SOW/drawings? Is the scope included? |
| See Note #14 and #20 on sheet A-201 and Detail #2 on sheet A303. In scope. |
| 51. The specs call for cement plastering on the areas affected by window/stucco work. The SOW/drawings don't call for plaster. Is the scope included? |
| See Note #14 and #20 on sheet A-201 and Details 1 A/B and 2 on sheet A303. In scope. |
| 52. The specs call for a full equipment testing, balancing, commissioning, reports, etc. The SOW/drawings don't call for it. Is the scope included? |
| No commissioning required. |
| 53. Are the attic and concealed spaces fully accessible for confirming existing conditions (e.g., exhaust fans, framing support, concealed mechanical/electrical lines)? If not, will exploratory demolition be allowed before bid? |
| There are attic access openings above the freezer in the Kitchen area, and in the Elevator Penthouse at the top of Stair #3. The attic may also be accessed through dormers. |
| 54. Will the Owner provide baseline testing results for existing materials (e.g., lead paint, asbestos in stucco or window glazing)? Or should the contractor carry allowance for abatement testing? |
| See attached hazardous material survey. |
| 55. For roof replacement areas, especially clay tile: Are there specific requirements for temporary protection of the kitchen and food service operations beneath during tear-off? |
| Daily food preparation is required to continue during the project. The contractor is to provide necessary safety measures so that cooking operations are not compromised. |
| 56. The specs note replacing deteriorated decking/framing “if discovered.” Can the Owner provide any prior inspection reports to define the likely scope? Should the contractor carry a quantity-based unit price or lump sum allowance? |
| 1,024 square feet of deck is to be included as an allowance |
| 57. Are crane or lift operations restricted due to adjacent buildings, airspace, or utility proximity (especially over Building 4’s operational zones)? |
| No |
| 58. The drawings show typical window types but don't provide counts by elevation. Can the Owner confirm a window count schedule for bidding, or should bidders field-verify quantities? |
| Refer to sheet A-001. |
| 59. There are references to lead-based paint and asbestos. Can the VA confirm limits of known hazardous materials and whether abatement will be part of base scope or treated as a change order? |
| See the attached report. Notes on demolition sheets refer to Hazardous materials. Lead paint is confirmed on noted windows and wood molding trim. No asbestos was detected. Abatement is necessary for lead paint. No change orders will be granted for said abatement. |
| 60. If the attic ventilation and structural bracing work exceeds what’s shown, how will changes be handled—by T&M, unit pricing, or pre-negotiated allowance? |
| Each change will be addressed on an individual basis on this anticipated firm-fixed-price contract. |
| 61. There’s mention of potential reuse of existing circuits and window A/C openings. Can the Owner clarify: What is the expected ratio of reuse vs. new installation (especially for electrical circuits)? |
| Refer to the electrical drawings for scope of work to use existing electrical. 90% reuse. |
| 62. Can the Owner confirm phasing milestone requirements, beyond the general "Phase I: Demo / Phase II: Work"? Will interim inspections or partial handovers be required? |
| See General Demolition Notes on Sheet G-201, Note “N” and “O”. Note N specifies 3 windows at a time. Note O specifies the contractor to submit a plan prior to work. |
| 63. What are the working hour limitations? Are weekends, evenings, or early morning hours available to make up time lost due to weather or utility shutdown coordination? |
| See question #40. |
| 64. On page A-001 it asks the contractor to remove all the windows and then field verify measurements PRIOR to fabrication. Is this a misprint? |
| Contractor is responsible for field verification of openings for new window replacement. Existing windows are to be replaced with new window at same time of existing window removal. |
| 65. Various places mention steel windows needing asbestos abatement. Can you specify how many steel windows are are expecting to encounter asbestos and where those are located? Do you have documentation from someone who tested these areas? |
| Refer to sheets AD 200 and AD 201. Refer to note 7A as detailed on the drawings. These were not tested to confirm asbestos in the sealant due to the small quantity below reportable limits. |
| 66. Based on the other exterior remodels the VA has completed, can you share where we can expect to see lead paint and does the VA have a preferred method for abatement? |
| Lead paint samples were taken on the wood molding exterior trim and metal windows. Means and methods determined by contractor. |
| 67. Regarding the handrails, in the SOW in one place it says for handrails to remain while we sand and paint and in another place it says to remove them for prep and paint. Can the VA clarify what is expected? |
| Notes are location specific and to be followed. See note # 12 on sheet AD-100 and note 16 on sheet AD 102 . The handrail on the roof is no longer required. The handrail by the stairs are to be prepped and repainted. See above notes. |
| 68. How many steel ladders total are to be repaired and repainted? |
| Refer to sheets AD 200 which has 1 ladder and 4 ladders shown on AD 201 |
| 69. Confirm Canopy roof material, reinstalling? Is it a metal roof, or TPO or some kind of compatible flat roof membrane? |
| Note #2 on sheet A-102; Note #20 on sheet A-103; and Note #14 on sheet A-200 confirm metal roofing on canopies. |
| 70. Can you confirm the exiting roof? From the Deck up? Plans state mob bit but it looks like there’s gravel on it in the pictures. I know some of it is built up. |
| Refer to sheet AD102, key note #1 – the roof is a built up roof with gravel. Note #1 on AD 100 should be built up roof with gravel. |
| 71. Are temp protections/fence shown on G-300 required for the duration of the project, or only in areas of work as work in those areas is being completed to maintain acceptable safety standards in coordination with the VA COR? |
| As roofing and exterior window replacement and exterior painting work is on-going, or will be forth coming, these safety areas must be maintained. |
| 72. Is the Contractor expected to obtain any special approvals and/or inspections from NPS or any other entities aside from the VA itself in conformance with the specs? |
| No additional approvals or inspections at this time. The AE will partner with the VA to confirm conformance to Specifications. |
| 73. Stucco repair is mentioned in Scope of Work at specific locations; however, A-200 and A-201 suggest the entire building is to have stucco repaired, with new as shown on A-303. Please confirm scope. |
| Scope of Work is confirmed as indicated on the referenced elevation sheets, A200 and A201. This does not apply to the entire building, only specific areas as outlined in the notes. |
| 74. No electrical work is indicated at location of replaced rooftop turbine vents. Please confirm existing feeds are to be used and no accessories/switches added. |
| Refer to sheets M-102 and EP 102. |
| 75. Please confirm if Contractor can assume building is only occupied during normal business hours, and that off-hours work is otherwise permissible. |
| Refer to sheet G-201, General Note “H” The building will be occupied 7 days a week from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM. |
76. Clarification on Minimum Dollar Threshold for Past Performance Projects Section A.6 of the solicitation, under Factor 3 – Past Performance, states that submitted projects shall have a minimum construction value of between $2,000,000 and $5,000,000 and be either 100% completed or ongoing (>50% complete). We would like to confirm whether a past performance project valued under $2,000,000 may still be submitted for evaluation. Specifically, will such a submission be deemed responsive and evaluated by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB), or will it be automatically disqualified?
You will be evaluated assuming you meet the other minimum requirements.
You may submit projects valued at under the magnitude listed and may not evaluated as highly as a offeror who does submit a project within this magnitude.
77. Submission of a Portion of a Larger Project We are currently the prime contractor on a larger construction contract involving both roofing and HVAC scopes of work. The overall project exceeds $7 million; however, we are interested in submitting only the roofing portion, which is valued within the $2M–$5M range and meets the other relevancy criteria (clinical setting, similar complexity, etc.).
Please confirm if we may submit and isolate this portion of the larger project as a standalone past performance example, and whether the SSEB will evaluate it as such, so long as we clearly delineate the roofing work and its scope, value, and completion status.
Yes.
You may submit and isolate this portion of the larger project in your proposal.
