598-23-136 Prebid RFIs Answered.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 439 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Y1DA--598-23-136 Permanent Structural Repairs Laundry Building 159 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C25625R0136
About this file
This document is a Request for Information (RFI) response log for a VA structural repair project at the Little Rock VA Medical Center's Laundry Building 159. The project involves permanent structural repairs to the lower basement ceiling and beams, specifically addressing concrete deterioration near a greywater tank. Key technical details include removing deteriorated concrete, replacing corroded reinforcement, applying Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) strengthening for shear capacity, and implementing specific repair techniques.
The solicitation (36C25625R0136) covers a 210-day period of performance with multiple amendments extending the offer due date. Contractors must provide detailed technical submittals, including FRP design calculations stamped by an Arkansas-registered engineer. Critical requirements include dedicated on-site personnel (superintendent, safety officer, quality control manager), specific concrete repair methods, and coordination with VA laundry facility operations. The project involves complex technical work with specific constraints around utility shutdowns, parking, laydown areas, and site access, all managed through the Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C25625R0136 0005.docx | DOCX document | |
| B159 Site Visit Sign In.pdf | ||
| 36C25625R0136 0004.docx | DOCX document | |
| S04 SITE VISIT SIGN IN SHEET REPAIR B159 Laundry.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 36C25625R0136 0003.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C25625R0136 0002.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C25625R0136 0001.pdf | ||
| Wage Determination AR20250032.pdf | ||
| 598-23-136 Revised SOW 07252025.pdf | ||
| 598-23-136 Drawings.pdf | ||
| 23-154 Structural Site Assessment 20250225.pdf | ||
| 598-23-136 Revised Specs 07252025.pdf | ||
| 36C25625R0136.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 13
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
Comment-Response Log
| Project Name: | Little Rock Laundry Structural Repair |
| VA Project Number: | 598-21-136 |
| ACG Project Number: | 23-154 |
| Pre-Bid RFIs / AE Response Log | ||||||||
| REQUIRED | ||||||||
| Item | ||||||||
| # | Sheet / | |||||||
| Page # | VA Comments | Entry | ||||||
| Date | Photo/Diagram | Discipline | AE Responder Initials | AE Accept/ Reject? | AE Response | Column1 | ||
| 1 | Please provide a copy of the Site Visit Attendance Sheet. | Site Visit Attendance Sheet attached. | OK | |||||
| 2 | Please confirm this is not a sales tax-exempt project. If sales tax-exempt, will the government provide the prime contractor with a tax-exempt certificate for use by subcontractors and vendors? | Contractors are deemed the end consumer on all materials purchased under a government contract for the state of Arkansas. The tax exemption only applies to direct sales to the federal government that are paid with federal funds. The exemption doesn’t flow through to contractors. | ||||||
| 3 | Is a Superintendent employed by the GC a requirement for this project? | Yes. | Y | |||||
| 4 | If a Prime Contractor is awarded multiple projects at the same VA Medical Center location: Can the Superintendent be shared across multiple projects at the same site/location, or should they only be dedicated full-time to this project only? | No. The project Superintendent must be dedicated to this project. | ||||||
| 5 | Please confirm the Superintendent cannot serve as the SSHO. | The project Superintendent shall be dedicated to this job with no other responsibilities on the project. | ||||||
| 6 | If the Super can’t be the SSHO and the SSHO is required to be onsite full-time, please confirm the SSHO cannot be assigned to another project on the same property. | The project SSHO shall be dedicated to this job with no other responsibilities on the project. | ||||||
| 7 | If the Super can’t be the SSHO, can a subcontractor fulfill the SSHO role? | Response by VA | ||||||
| 8 | Please confirm if tuberculosis testing is required before contractors can commence work onsite. | No. | N | |||||
| 9 | Please confirm if influenza vaccines are required for all contractors and subcontractors’ employees who work on the site or if masks will be required. | No influenza vacciness or masks are required at this time. | N | |||||
| 10 | The period of performance (POP) for this project is stated as 210 days. We estimate that preconstruction activities (submittals, procurement, mobilization, etc.) will require approximately 90 days prior to the start of construction. If the VA plans to issue NTP before preconstruction begins, we request that the POP be extended by 90 days to account for these preconstruction activities. | POP is 210 days. Contractor to plan accordingly. | N | |||||
| 11 | Once awarded, will the VA provide an Administrative NTP to allow time for subcontracts to be executed, GC & Subs to work together to develop a project schedule, provide SF1413s, and prepare other Division 1 submittals? | No. | N | |||||
| 12 | Once awarded, if the VA will not provide an Administrative NTP, will the VA allow up to 90 days between the kickoff meeting and the NTP? | This can be discussed after award. No Administrative NTP will be allowed. | N | |||||
| 13 | Instead of the provided cost estimate breakdown, will the government accept a printout report from our COTS estimating software that provides the same level of breakdown specified in the government-provided breakdown spreadsheet? | Provide per the solicitation requirements. | N | |||||
| 14 | How many separate rooms will ICRA be required in? Please provide drawings showing where the ICRA walls or barriers are required. | An ICRA plan will be provided and reviewed before construction begins. | ||||||
| 15 | Will the VA allow the use of Zip Wall (plastic sheathing with support poles) for barriers and containment on this project? If so, can it be used instead of a Temp Wall System such as Starc Wall/Edge Guard? | An ICRA plan will be provided and reviewed before construction begins. | ||||||
| 16 | If necessary, will negative air machines be permitted to exhaust through HEPA filter into the occupied space? If not, where can negative air machines be exhausted? | An ICRA plan will be provided and reviewed before construction begins. | ||||||
| 17 | Is any scope of work for this project required to be performed outside of regular work hours? If so, what will the work hours and days be for scopes required to be performed outside of regular work hours? | Potential utility outages will require coordination with the laundry facility.Outages of any kind that occur will be coordinated with the VA for planning purposes. The project COR will assist with coordination. | ||||||
| 18 | Are water connections available near the construction area? | Yes. The VA will coordinate with the contractor before construciton begins. | ||||||
| 19 | Are electrical outlets available for contractors to connect to in the construction area? If not, where are electrical outlets available for contractors to connect to? | Yes. The VA will coordinate with the contractor before construciton begins. | ||||||
| 20 | If no electrical outlets nor temp power are available, a generator will be required, which usually adds significant cost to rent and fuel. Please confirm this is necessary if no power is available. | See previous response. | ||||||
| 21 | Will the VA provide space for the Prime Contractor’s Superintendent to set up, or should we add costs to our bid for a mobile office? |
| Where can the mobile office be located? | |||
| Is space available for a 8’ x 40’ temporary ground-level office? | |||
| Are contractors required to set a pole and meter for electric usage in the mobile office? | |||
| Where is the electrical connection for power to the mobile office? | |||
| What is the distance between the electrical connection and the proposed location of the mobile offi | |||
| Is a 208V, 125A breaker available for connection to the mobile office? | |||
| If a breaker isn't available, is a spare available? | |||
| Would contractors be expected to supply the needed breaker? | |||
| Will the feeder between the electrical connection and the mobile office need to be underground? | |||
| Will this feeder need to run across any asphalt or concrete roads or parking lots? | Parking Lot 10 in the Northwest end of campus can be used for a project office and for a laydown area. VA will coordinate before mobilization to the project. | ||
| 22 | Where are the designated contractors' and subcontractors' parking area? | Parking Lot 10 in the Northwest end of campus can be used for a project office and for a laydown area. VA will coordinate before mobilization to the project. | |
| 23 | Is parking available for 2-3 vehicles for the prime contractor and each subcontractor for a total of 4-6 vehicles? Where shall these people park if the VA cannot make 2-3 spaces available for the prime contractor and each of the subs for a total of 4-6 vehicles? | Parking Lot 10 in the Northwest end of campus can be used for a project office and for a laydown area. VA will coordinate before mobilization to the project. Additional parking may be coordinated before mobilization. | |
| 24 | Will the VA provide space for a 20-yard dumpster? | The VA will coordinate with the contractor to locate near Building 159. However, operations of the laundry facility and patient parking areas are prioritized over convenince of a location of a dumpster. | |
| 25 | Where shall contractor dumpsters be located? | The VA will coordinate with the contractor to locate. However, operations of the laundry facility and patient parking areas are prioritized over convenince of a location of a dumpster. | |
| 26 | Can the VA accommodate a dumpster near the job site? | The VA will coordinate with the contractor to locate near Buliding 159. However, operations of the laundry facility and patient parking areas are prioritized over convenince of a location of a dumpster. | |
| 27 | Will the VA allow contractors to use VA indoor restrooms? | No. | |
| 28 | If required, can Porta Johns be placed within a 100’ radius of the job site / work area? | Contractor to assume the use of portable toilets is required. The VA will coordinatewith the contractor on a location near Building 159. | |
| 29 | Is temporary construction fencing required at the laydown area? | Follow the requirements of the project specifications. | |
| 30 | Please confirm that the current design documents meet current VA TIL guidelines. | Yes, the current design documents meet current VA TIL guidelines. | |
| 31 | Is there any work not included in the drawings or contract documents that will need to be performed under the contract? | At this time there are no additional requirements. The delegated FRP design may introduce some additional requirements once completed. | |
| 32 | Please confirm if the greywater tank will remain in service during construction. If so, what protective measures (e.g., temporary covers, waterproofing membrane, chemical isolation) are required to prevent vapor intrusion and corrosion during concrete removal and FRP installation? | At this time there are no additional requirements for waterproofing. The delegated FRP design may introduce some additional requirements once completed. | |
| 33 | Please confirm whether concrete removal is limited to visibly deteriorated areas or must extend until all reinforcement is verified uncorroded. | Concrete removal shall extend beyond visibly deteriorated areas until sound substrate and uncorroded reinforcement are reached. All delaminated, unsound, or chloride-contaminated concrete and corroded reinforcing steel must be removed as indicated in the Structural Assessment Report and Details 1/S-001 and 2/S-001. Contractor shall field-verify limits of removal based on actual conditions and VA/AE inspection prior to repair placement. The goal is to ensure all exposed reinforcement is clean and sound before patching or applying FRP. | |
| 34 | Please confirm whether epoxy-coated or zinc-rich primed bars are required adjacent to the greywater tank exposure. | Epoxy-coated or zinc-rich primed reinforcement is not required for this repair scope. | |
| 35 | State the required fire performance for FRP and whether FRP will be left exposed or encapsulated in the lower-basement. | FRP strengthening is a delegated design by the Contractor’s qualified specialty engineer. The FRP designer shall determine the final system composition and fire-protective method (encapsulation, intumescent coating, or noncombustible ceiling cover) to ensure compliance with VA PG-18-10 and ACI 440.2R/ACI 562 fire-resistance provisions. |
The installed FRP system shall achieve a Class A flame spread and smoke-developed index ≤ 25/450 per ASTM E84 and maintain the existing fire rating of the lower-basement space. The Contractor shall submit documentation verifying compliance for review and acceptance prior to installation.
36 The Repair Strategy calls for removing deteriorated concrete and replacing corroded longitudinal bars. Please confirm the acceptance criterion for termination of demo and minimum cover restoration before FRP. Concrete removal shall continue until sound substrate is reached and all exposed reinforcement is free of corrosion (bright metal surface, no pitting or scale). Termination of demolition is acceptable where the remaining concrete is solid under hammer sounding and rebar exhibits no active corrosion after cleaning.
Before FRP installation, restore a minimum clear concrete cover of ¾ inch over reinforcement using non-shrink, cementitious repair mortar (ASTM C1107) with a saturated surface-dry (SSD) substrate and approved bonding agent. Surface irregularities shall be ground smooth to meet ACI 440.2R substrate prep requirements (ICRI CSP 3–5).
| 37 | Recommendations note patch repairs for damaged columns at upper/first floors, with no immediate strengthening elsewhere. Please confirm that no FRP is required above the lower-basement. | Confirmed. No FRP is required above the lower-basement. | ||||
| 38 | Please confirm whether FRP is intended strictly for shear strengthening or if any members require flexural strengthening. | FRP is intended strictly for shear strengthening of the identified members (see S-101 design shear “V” notes and repair details on S-001). No flexural FRP is specified or required under the current design. | ||||
| 39 | Please issue a table of required design loads per location (shear Vu, and flexure if any) and where along each beam/gutter those apply. | A separate load table will not be issued. The required factored design shears (V) are already shown by member and location on Sheet S-101 and govern the delegated FRP design. The specialty FRP engineer shall use the V values indicated on S-101 and design the shear strengthening accordingly. If a convenience tabulation is desired, the Contractor may extract these values from S-101. | ||||
| 40 | Please issue Apogee’s FRP design forces table (Vu/Mu at each location with governing load combos and section offsets) so bidders can price the FRP scope accurately. | We will not issue a separate FRP design-forces table. FRP is a delegated design; the factored design shears (V) required for pricing and design are already shown by member and location on Sheet S-101. No flexural FRP is required, so Mu is not provided. | ||||
| 41 | SOW 1.04; Apogee Report 3.1.2 | Confirm whether FRP design forces will be issued before bid or delegated post-award. | As stated in the assessment report and drawing general notes, FRP is a delegated design: the factored design shears (V) are already shown on Sheet S-101, and the FRP repair plan, calculations, and shop drawings are to be prepared post-award by the Contractor’s specialty engineer and submitted for AE review and approval. | |||
| 42 | SOW 1.04; Apogee Report 2.2 | Clarify limits/quantities for concrete removal and patching (SF or CY). | Concrete quantities (SF/CY) are not prescribed on the drawings. Removal limits are performance-based: demo all delaminated/unsound concrete and any concrete necessary to expose and clean/replace corroded reinforcing, continuing until sound substrate and uncorroded steel are reached, then patch per details. See S-001 notes: “Remove beyond delamination to solid concrete… apply bonding agent… provide holes for air to escape… place repair mortar so there are no voids at the interface.” Bidders shall field-verify and carry costs for removal/patching within the repair areas indicated; no separate AE-issued takeoff is provided. Patching uses non-shrink cementitious repair mortar per ASTM C1107, SSD substrate, with 1/2" sawcut edges as shown. Under current documents, quantities remain contractor-verified per field conditions. | |||
| 43 | Apogee Report 2.1; Drawings S1 | Confirm access dimensions and confined space requirements at greywater tank. | Project AE and VA will coordinate with contractor before construction. | |||
| 44 | Specs 01 00 00 1.4 I,J | Confirm if after-hours/weekend work permitted and if premium time should be included. | No after-hours or weekend work is specifically required in the bid. However, utility shutdowns impacting the operations of the laundry facility will need to be coordinated with the VA. Depending on the utility, time and scope of work there may be a need to have work done outside of the operations of the laundry facility. | |||
| 45 | SOW 1.04.5–6 | Confirm if covered laydown or off-site staging is allowed for materials. | There is no covered laydown area on-site. | |||
| 46 | SOW 1.04.9 | Request as-built utility drawings to avoid conflicts during demo. | The VA does not have As-Built complete internal utility drawings. The VA can provide what is available before construction. | |||
| 47 | SOW 1.04.1 | Confirm if shoring design must be sealed by an Arkansas P.E. | Yes. | Y | ||
| 48 | Specs Div 03 01 30.72 | Request acceptable FRP manufacturers or minimum performance properties. | Follow the requirements of the project specifications. | N | ||
| 49 | Specs 01 45 35; 01 45 29 | Clarify which items require 3rd-party testing (bond, pull-off, etc.). | Follow the requirements of the project specifications. | |||
| 50 | Specs 01 00 00 1.9 | Confirm acceptable format for as-built drawings (PDF vs CAD). | Response by VA | |||
| 51 | SOW 1.04.11 | Clarify duration infection control barriers must remain in place. | ICRA barriers will be in place before work begins and not be taken down until work is completed and accepted by VA Infection Control and the project COR. | Y | ||
| 52 | SOW 1.04; Drawings | Identify location and drawings for two damaged columns referenced in SOW. | Columns are not part of the work defined in the SOW | N/A | ||
| 53 | Apogee Report 1.1 | Request copy of 2023 Calibre Concrete Report referenced in Apogee report. | Report attached for reference purposes. | |||
| 54 | Drawings S1/S4 | Confirm ceiling height and clearance limits in the lower basement. | Can be confirmed after award | |||
| 55 | Specs 01 00 00 1.4 | Confirm if work can proceed as a single phase or must be segmented. | This is contractors mean and methods. There is an order of items that must be completed before starting other parts of the project, but the order of work is not defined at this time. | |||
| 56 | The structural assessment report identifies deficiencies in the lower basement, upper basement, and first floor. Will the VA clarify whether all recommended repairs within Building 159 should be included in the bid, or only those requiring repair of overhead girder beams and beams under the old gutters? | Only the work described in the statement of work should be included in the bid. | ||||
| 57 | Will the VA provide an extension of the bid due date by at least three weeks after all RFI’s responses are published to allow sufficient time to review and prepare them to provide the best price possible? | The offer due date will be made by an amendment. | ||||
| 58 | Will the VA consider not making the bid due the week of Thanksgiving, the Monday after, or any day immediately before or after the Christmas and New Years Holidays? | The offer due date will be made by an amendment. | ||||
| 59 | Spec Section 03 01 30.72-5 states that the contractor is responsible for providing third party special inspections. Will the VA please confirm if the government’s design A&E will provide any special inspections or if the VA will in fact expect the contractor to provide all certified tests and inspections? | The contractors retained thrid party inspector will perform tests and inspections as required. The Engineer of Record will provide design support as required in the proejct specifications. | ||||
| 60 | Will the VA provide MEP as-built drawings of the lower basement area to assist the contractor in developing a viable plan for rerouting or relocating systems as needed to perform the necessary repairs? | The VA will provide available MEP information in coordination with Engineer of Record after award. | ||||
| 61 | The existing contract documents were not clear nor did they qualify the level of MEP involvement in the project. The CFP process will require the girder beams and beam below the gutter to be widened and enlarged, requiring the removal and permanent relocation of several MEP and fire lines in the basement. In order to adequately budget that work, those MEP lines need to be traced back to their source and a new path identified. During the site visit, the local CO (Mr. Jones) insinuated that another site visit was possible and to ask for one if necessary. | |||||
| a. | Will the VA coordinate a second site visit for the purposes of qualifying the MEP involvement in this project? | There will not be a second site visit. | ||||
| 62 | Will the VA consider allowing the awarded contractor some space inside the work site or in the immediate area inside the building 159 to set up a desk for the onsite superintendent and other required individuals? | No. | ||||
| 63 | For how long can interruptions to utility services occur? | This will need to be coordinated with the project COR and the Laundry Facility. The facility operates daily, so outages will need to be minimzed in impact for facility operations. | ||||
| 64 | Can this work be performed outside of normal working hours if needed to minimize impact? | |||||
| a. | If so, what are the limitations of continuous work outside of these normal working hours? | Shutdowns will need to be coordinated with the project COR and the Laundry facility. | ||||
| 65 | The specifications do not include the 01 45 00 Quality Control Section. Neither the contracting Solicitation nor the Specifications make a reference to the requirement of having an onsite CQCM. Additionally, the IGE can likely not sustain the cost of an independent SSHO, CQCM, and a Site Superintendent. | |||||
| a. | For the sake of conserving the VA’s budget, will the VA authorize the SSHO to be dual purposed as the Site Superintendent? | |||||
| b. | Will the VA clearly specify (in something other than a “yes” or “no” answer) if they are going to require that each one of these roles are to be filled by individuals and be onsite and solely dedicated to this project? | Response by VA | ||||
| 66 | What are the normal working hours for this building? | 7 am to 5pm | ||||
| 67 | Are there any work hours or unstated restrictions which will impede the contractor’s productivity for performing the repairs? | As noted above, scope of utility outages and their work requirements are unknowns at this time. The FRP design is also may have additional impacts once completed | ||||
| 68 | The pictures below identify areas of spalling on the concrete deck. Some of these areas have repairs that are failing, and some of them do not have any repairs at all. The areas of spalling and concern are not associated with the failed girder beam nor failed girder beam under the gutter. During the site visit we counted an approximate 150 square feet of spalled overhead concrete on the bottom side of the slab. The pictures below are examples only, and are not all encompassing of the total amount of failed overhead concrete that needs attention. |
| a. | Does the VA want these areas which have been previously repaired to undergo corrective action and be properly repaired with new mortar? | |||
| b. | Does the VA want these areas which are new and have not been previously repaired to be undergo corrective action and be repaired during the course of this project? | |||
| c. | If the VA wants these smaller areas repaired, then the contractor will need some level of standardization in unit pricing. Otherwise none of the contractors will be on the same page. In order to maintain standardization, the contractors will need some type of standard language with standard unit pricing. Will the VA please consider incorporating something similar to the script below into the pricing structure of this solicitation. | Bid per the contract documents. | ||
| 69 | In the northwest corner of the lower basement, existing adjustable posts and supplemental framing support were added during renovations in 2017 and 2023, per the July 2023 Concrete Assessment Report. | |||
| i. | Did the VA retain a professional engineer with stamped shoring drawings to decide where and how to shore the damaged overhead girder beams? | |||
| 1. | If so, will the VA provide those PE-stamped drawings and calculations for the existing shoring design? | |||
| ii. | Will the VA provide a copy of the concrete assessment report performed by Calibre, dated July 13, 2023? | The VA will provide for RFP design and evaluation. | ||
| 70 | Are all MEP installations within the laundry room active? | |||
| a. | Is the VA immediately aware of any MEP installations in the basement that are not active? | Individual MEP services will need to be identified as necessary. | ||
| 71 | Is the VA aware of any abandoned MEP lines immediately below the failed girder beams and above the grey water tank that can be abandoned and removed prior to commencing work? | Individual MEP services will need to be identified as necessary. | ||
| 72 | Does the greywater tank need to remain active throughout the entire repair process? | Yes. | ||
| 73 | The Report PDF Page 18 states that “greywater within the tank contains chemical and moisture constituents… The continuous exposure of the lower basement ceiling to these corrosive agents accelerates the deterioration process.” Will the VA specify the chemical constituents emitted from the greywater tank? | Assume any detergents or cleaning products found in an industrial laundry facility. The VA does not have a specific list. | ||
| 74 | The SOW PDF Page 5, Paragraph 1.04.A.6. references a “Partial Site Plan with Contractor Parking and Contractor Laydown Areas designated.” This plan was not provided with the solicitation documents. | |||
| a. | Will the VA please provide the designated laydown area plan? | |||
| b. | For the purposes of scheduling time and labor, what is an approximate distance from building 159 that the contractor can expect to have their storage container with equipment and materials located? | Bids should assume that the laydown area will be located in Parking Lot 10 in the Northwest corner of the North Little Rock VA campus. | ||
| 75 | Has an asbestos survey been conducted in the lower basement area? If so, will the VA provide the asbestos survey? | The VA has no records of asbestos in the area of work. | ||
| 76 | Will the VA be responsible for the cost and execution of the asbestos and lead testing? | This is a firm fixed price contract award. | ||
| 77 | Should the offeror include a cost allowance in their bid for potential asbestos abatement? | |||
| a. | If so, will the VA provide a line item similar to the work list item listed in question 3D with estimated quantities to support accurate pricing? | This is a firm fixed price contract award. | ||
| 78 | The material specification on S-001 references welding for rebar replacement, while the report recommends mechanical splices. | |||
| a. | In lieu of welding, will the VA allow the use of mechanical couplers or splicing for rebar repairs? | |||
| b. | Would the VA prefer that this method be engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | a) Mechanical couplers (mechanical splices) shall be used for rebar replacement as recommended in the Structural Assessment Report. b) The use and detailing of mechanical splices are not part of the delegated FRP design. This requirement is already incorporated in the contract documents and does not require a separate engineered submittal unless the Contractor proposes an alternate product. Product data and capacity documentation for the selected mechanical splice system shall be submitted for AE review and approval. | ||
| 79 | The submittal section on S-001 references Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) under “Structural Steel Repair,” and Key Note 1.c on S-101 states “Replace corroded longitudinal steel rebar with new steel rebar utilizing FRP for shear capacity.” Will the VA clarify whether the intent is to apply FRP to structural steel rather than concrete structural elements? | the FRP strengthening applies to concrete structural elements, not to any structural steel members. The FRP is intended for shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams and gutters identified on Sheet S-101, not for steel framing. | ||
| 80 | Detail 1 “Typical Repair Below Beam” on drawing S-001 calls for concrete to be in a saturated surface dry condition when placing mortar but also mentions applying a bonding agent to the substrate. | |||
| a. | Since only one method can be used, will the VA please clarify which method should be followed for bidding purposes? | |||
| b. | Would the VA prefer that this method be engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | a) The intent is to use both conditions in sequence, not as alternatives. The substrate shall be in a saturated surface-dry (SSD) condition, and then a bonding agent shall be applied immediately before placing the repair mortar. This combination ensures proper adhesion between existing and new concrete. The repair surface shall be SSD (moist but without free water) at the time of bonding-agent application, and the mortar shall be placed while the bonding agent remains tacky, per the manufacturer’s recommendations. b) This procedure is not part of the delegated FRP design and does not require separate engineering or stamping. It follows standard concrete-repair practice in ACI 546R and ACI 562, and is covered by the existing design documents (Sheet S-001, Detail 1 “Typical Repair Below Beam”). The Contractor shall submit the bonding agent product data sheet and application procedure for AE review and acceptance. | ||
| 81 | The stated repair method for the overhead girder beam is to build a form and use the bird-mouth gravity flow approach. This approach provides limited effectiveness and often results in hand packing to achieve full coverage. Form and pump is a superior alternative for serious concrete issues for several reasons. ACI RAP-5 (Repair Application Procedures) identify the use of Form & Pump Technologies as an industry wide preferred method of repair and will provide the VA with a high strength, low-viscosity repair using pumped material under pressure. The chart below identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the form and pump process in comparison to the design intent of this project. |
| a. | Will the VA substitute the basis of design method for the Form & Pump method of repair? | |||
| b. | If approved, will contractors be required to demonstrate specific qualifications or experience to perform the form-and-pump repair technique? | |||
| c. | If not approved, will the contractors be required to demonstrate specific qualifications, certificates, and experience to perform the BoD birds mouth method of repair? | |||
| d. | Would the VA prefer and/or require that the form and pump method be engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | a) The Form & Pump repair method, as an alternate to the bird-mouth gravity-flow approach indicated on the drawings, may be submitted review prior to implementation. b) If the alternate Form & Pump method is approved, the Contractor must demonstrate specific experience and qualifications with pressure grouting or form-and-pump repairs, including a qualified crew and an ACI-certified supervisor. Submittals shall include the product data, mix design, pressure control procedure, and manufacturer certification. c) If the Contractor elects to perform the bird-mouth gravity flow method as shown, no special certification beyond normal concrete-repair qualifications is required. d) The Form & Pump method does not require separate engineering or stamping unless the Contractor’s proposal modifies the repair geometry or structural load path. In that case, an Arkansas-licensed structural engineer shall stamp the submittal as part of a delegated design. | ||
| 82 | Is bond testing required for the overhead concrete repair areas on this project? If required, please specify the following: | |||
| a. | What test method should be used (e.g., pull-off testing per ASTM C1583)? | |||
| b. | What is the minimum bond strength acceptance criteria? | |||
| c. | How many tests are required per area or per square footage? | |||
| d. | Should testing be performed before or after full-scale repair application? | |||
| e. | Are there any special conditions or surface preparation standards that must be verified prior to testing? | |||
| f. | Would the VA prefer that these standards and requirements listed above be engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | Bond testing is not required by the Contract Documents for the overhead concrete patch repairs. | ||
| 83 | Will the VA provide the original structural drawings dated May 2, 1955 including the existing member geometry, steel reinforcement layout, concrete compressive strength, and steel yield strength of the reinforcing steel? | The VA will provide the structural information that is available in coordination with the Enginer of Record. | ||
| 84 | Will the VA please confirm that the shear demand shown on detail 2/ S-101 represents the total factored shear demand on the beams (Vu)? | |||
| a. | If the VA cannot calculate or does not have the means to calculate the shear demand, will the VA prefer that this calculation be provided by the contractor, engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | Yes. The “V” values shown on S-101 are the total factored shear demands (Vu) at the indicated locations. | ||
| 85 | Will the VA please confirm that the un-strengthened beam shear capacities that were used to check the FRP strengthening limit (ACI PRC 440.2-17, Section 9.2) do not consider the contribution of steel stirrups due to the stirrups being cut and no longer developed for shear strength (per detail 1/S-001 on drawings dated 02/27/2025)? | |||
| a. | If the VA cannot confirm nor does not have the means to confirm this, will the VA prefer that this confirmation be provided by the contractor, engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | Yes, confirmed. | ||
| 86 | For the shear loading indicated on detail 2/S-101, will the VA please specify the extent along the length of the beams that will require FRP strengthening for the provided shear demands? | |||
| a. | Will the VA please confirm whether the full length of the beams with cut stirrups should be strengthened with FRP? | |||
| b. | If the VA cannot confirm the strengthening requirements for neither the length of the beams requiring FRP nor the beams with cut stirrups, should the contractor provide this solution via engineer stamped drawings during the delegated design process? | The extent of FRP is part of the delegated FRP design and shall cover the beam segments where stirrups are removed/cut (Vs = 0) and where the factored shear demand (Vu) shown on S-101 must be resisted. The specialty FRP engineer shall determine the start/stop stations, wrap lengths/anchorage, and terminations to develop the required capacity, using the factored loads on S-101 and the repair details on S-001. a) Not necessarily the full length. Strengthen the full length of any zone where stirrups are removed/undev and extend FRP beyond the deteriorated zone by the manufacturer/ACI-440 required development and termination lengths. If cut/removed stirrups occur throughout an entire beam, then FRP would extend accordingly; otherwise, provide targeted FRP only over the affected segments needed to satisfy the provided Vu. Submittals shall include a stamped FRP repair plan showing stationing and lengths. | ||
| 87 | Submittals General Note 5.a.1.a indicates that where loading is not shown, a minimum of 10 kips should be used. | |||
| a. | Is this 10 kip minimum the additional shear capacity that the FRP should be designed for, or is it the total shear capacity of beam after FRP strengthening (ϕVn = ϕ(Vn_existing + V_FRP))? | |||
| b. | If the VA cannot calculate or does not have the means to calculate the kips and the shear capacity, will the VA prefer that this calculation be provided by the contractor, engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | The 10 kip minimum is a fallback factored shear demand (Vu) to be used only if a location has no load shown. It is not a required total capacity nor an “additional” shear to add on top of existing. |
For this project, all required Vu values are already shown on S-101, so the 10-kip note is not applicable. Use the Vu values indicated on the plan for FRP design.
| 88 | Will the VA require any type of protective coating for the FRP that will provide fire-proof protection and repel/protect from the chemical constituents directly below in the greywater tank? | ||
| a. | Will the VA prefer that this requirement be provided by the contractor, engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | A protective coating over the FRP is not explicitly required by the current Contract Documents. However, because the deterioration mechanism is linked to chemical exposure and vapor migration from the adjacent greywater tank, protective measures should be considered to ensure long-term durability.FRP strengthening is a delegated design by the Contractor’s qualified specialty engineer. The FRP designer shall determine the final system composition and fire-protective method (encapsulation, intumescent coating, or noncombustible ceiling cover) to ensure compliance with VA PG-18-10 and ACI 440.2R/ACI 562 fire-resistance provisions. |
The installed FRP system shall achieve a Class A flame spread and smoke-developed index ≤ 25/450 per ASTM E84 and maintain the existing fire rating of the lower-basement space. The Contractor shall submit documentation verifying compliance for review and acceptance prior to installation.
| 89 | For detail 1/S-001, will the VA please provide the required steel dowel layout for adequate shear transfer between the new and existing concrete substrates at the reinforcing steel being replaced? | ||
| a. | If the VA cannot provide this layout, will the VA prefer that this layout be provided by the contractor, engineered and stamped through the delegated design process? | No additional steel dowel layout is required at Detail 1/S-001. Shear transfer across the repair interface is achieved by: |
1-Restoring reinforcement in kind (replace corroded bars and develop full capacity via mechanical splices/laps to existing bars), and
2-Concrete-to-concrete bond using SSD substrate + bonding agent, tight forms, and placement to eliminate interface voids per the detail.
| 90 | Spec Section 03 01 30.72-2 section 1.4.c.1 states to provide written documentation from the composite system manufacturer that the contractor has completed their training program. | ||
| a. | Due to the nature and complexity of the damage, does the VA expect the installers to have and submit individual training certificates as a required submittal? | ||
| b. | Does the VA require a minimum number of years of experience installing FRP systems? | ||
| c. | Does the VA require a minimum number of projects that installers must have completed using the specified FRP manufacturer’s materials? | ||
| d. | Most CFRP manufacturers are requiring trained installers prior to selling them material and backing warranties. To ensure the VA is awarding to a qualified and competent contractor, does the VA want the contractor to include a CFRP training certification to be submitted with the bid? | a) Training certs to be verified before construction. |
b) See Project Specifications.
c) See Project Specifications
d) Training certs to be provided before Construction.
91 A requirement to provide a technical narrative in addition to the past performance requirements will help the VA identify the right contractor for this project. Below is an example of subfactors that would be applicable to this consideration:
B Subfactor 1. Provide documentation of specific related work B Subfactor 2. Provide Project Construction Experience B Subfactor 3. Demonstrate clear understanding of project B Subfactor 4. Provide List of Key Personnel B Subfactor 5. Provide project implementation details B Subfactor 6. Provide means to maintain schedule B Subfactor 7. Provide contractor’s capabilities to complete the project B Subfactor 8. Provide Experience Modification Rate (EMR)
| Will the VA consider adding an Evaluation Factor and a Separate Volume for the technical narrative with a 40 page limit requirement? | Follow the instructions in the solicitation. | |||||||
| 92 | Will the VA increase the page limit requirement for the past performance to 40 pages? | Vendors should provide only relevent past performance. Follow the requirments in the solicitation. | ||||||
| 93 | Please clarify if a superintendent can be a dual hat to cover the requirements of SSHO? | No. Follow project specifications. | ||||||
| 94 | If no to the question above, will the SSHO need to be full-time for this project? | No. Follow project specifications. | ||||||
| 95 | Please clarify if a superintendent can be a dual hat to cover the requirements of QA/QC? | No. Follow project specifications. | ||||||
| 96 | If no to the question above, will the QA/QC need to be full time for this project? | Yes. Follow project specifcations | ||||||
| 97 | Can a superintendent be a triple hat to cover the requirements of SSHO and QA/QC? | No. Follow project specifications | ||||||
| 98 | Please confirm if tax should be included in our proposal? | Contractors are deemed the end consumer on all materials purchased under a government contract for the state of Arkansas. The tax exemption only applies to direct sales to the federal government that are paid with federal funds. The exemption doesn’t flow through to contractors. | ||||||
| 99 | Please confirm the current design documents meet current VA TIL guidelines. | Yes, the current design documents meet current VA TIL guidelines. | ||||||
| 100 | Volume II #5 the link does not seem to work. | |||||||
| 101 | Based on the material specifications on the drawing it appears specs are missing; here are a few examples. | |||||||
| i. | 03 21 11 | Plain Steel Reinforcement Bars | ||||||
| ii. | 03 21 19 | Stainless Steel Reinforcement Bars | ||||||
| iii. | 31 41 00 | Shoring | ||||||
| iv. | 03 06 30.13 | Concrete Footing Schedule | ||||||
| v. | 03 25 16 | Organic Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Reinforcing | ||||||
| vi. | 01 73 23 | Bracing and Anchoring | i. | 03 21 11 | Plain Steel Reinforcement Bars: will be provided | |||
| ii. | 03 21 19 | Stainless Steel Reinforcement Bars: Not used | ||||||
| iii. | 31 41 00 | Shoring: will be provided | ||||||
| iv. | 03 06 30.13 | Concrete Footing Schedule: not applicable | ||||||
| v. | 03 25 16 | Organic Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Reinforcing: not applicable | ||||||
| vi. | 01 73 23 | Bracing and Anchoring: will be provided | ||||||
| 102 | #5 (a) ( c ) under submittal states: “DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND SHOP DRAWINGS MUST BE STAMPED AND SIGNED BY CIVIL OR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS” Is this project is a design build project? | The FRP strengthening is a delegated design, thus the submittal of the FRP design shall bear the certification of an engineer. | ||||||
| 103 | Please confirm this is a design build, per General Notes: #5 on the drawings? Will evaluations be changed to reflect a design build? | The FRP strengthening is a delegated design, thus the submittal of the FRP design shall bear the certification of an engineer. | ||||||
| 104 | Should the past performance include a design build firm? | Past performance is completed performance the vendor did for projects of the same type and magnatude. | ||||||
| 105 | Please advise how much time we should carry for initial safety training of employees working on site IAW SOW Part 1.04.A.12 . Also, is training good for the contract duration or will they need to be retrained annually? | Check the period of performance for this requirement. | ||||||
| 106 | Confirm if repairs mentioned in Section 2.3 with exception of the columns, should be included in this project’s price. SOW states this section does not require immediate repair. | Only work described in the Statement of Work should be included. Work described in the Assessment is not part of the Statement of Work. | ||||||
| 107 | Confirm if rectifying the soil consolidation mentioned in Section 2.3 is part of this project? | Only work described in the Statement of Work should be included. Work described in the Assessment is not part of the Statement of Work. | ||||||
| 108 | Confirm if broken curb mentioned in Section 2.3 is part of this project? | Only work described in the Statement of Work should be included. Work described in the Assessment is not part of the Statement of Work. | ||||||
| 109 | Confirm if missing bracing rods is to be included in this project? | Only work described in the Statement of Work should be included. Work described in the Assessment is not part of the Statement of Work. | ||||||
| 110 | Confirm if any work associated with the greywater tank is to be included? Assessment states “a detailed root cause analysis was conducted, elucidating the synergistic deterioration mechanism initiated by the greywater tank.” and “By addressing the underlying source of deterioration, we can restore the structural integrity of the lower basement and ensure the long-term safety of the building.” However, all recommendations of repair activities are related to the beams, floor, columns but do not indicate work on the tank itself. | Only work described in the Statement of Work should be included. Work described in the Assessment is not part of the Statement of Work. | ||||||
| 111 | It is apparent that the concrete has experienced prolonged exposure to extremely high levels of toxic chlorine gasses. The remainder of the concrete could be subject to imminent failure as are the concrete beams in question. | |||||||
| a. | Did Apogee or another EoR perform any discovery and take any core samples for Chloride testing of the concrete beams and underside of slab which are being repaired in B159? | |||||||
| b. | If so, will the VA please provide these results? | |||||||
| c. | If not, will the VA please order random sampling chloride tests of the existing conditions then review and post the results before going any further with this solicitation? | Our assessment and repair design for Building 159 do not require chloride sampling at this time. |
Chloride-induced corrosion requires ionic migration through a moist concrete matrix, not transient gaseous exposure. In reinforced concrete, corrosion of embedded steel initiates only when chloride ions (Cl⁻) reach the steel surface through the pore solution. This process depends on diffusion or capillary transport of ions within the concrete’s moisture network. In contrast, intermittent or airborne chlorine-gas exposure does not enable ionic transport through the concrete and therefore cannot initiate corrosion at the depth of the reinforcing steel. Our prior site evaluation and the issued repair drawings (Appendix A) did not reveal conditions warranting chloride sampling. The deterioration is limited to a clearly defined area of the lower-basement ceiling and beams immediately adjacent to the greywater tank.
Accordingly, the prescribed repair scope which includes: complete removal of unsound concrete, replacement of corroded reinforcement, and application of FRP strengthening, remains the appropriate and sufficient corrective action.
| 112 | The PDF for the Drawings and the Structural Site Assessment are exactly the same. It appears as if they have been duplicated in error. Will the VA please clarify if there are additional drawings not associated with the structural site assessment? | The Structural Site Assessment had the drawings at the back for reference, as a stand-alone package. There are no other structural drawings at this time. | ||
| 113 | Page 14 (PDF Page 18 of 24) of the Drawings (A.K.A. the Structural Site Assessment file) contains notes related to the open nature of the greywater tank. The EoR states that this tank is the root cause for the structural concrete failures. The EoR stops short of giving a recommendation on how to mitigate this issue, but does state the following: In conclusion, addressing the root cause of structural deficiencies requires mitigating the effects of the greywater tank through appropriate protective measures and remedial actions. By addressing the underlying source of deterioration, the structural integrity of the lower basement ceiling can be restored, ensuring the long-term safety and stability of the building. | |||
| a. | There do not appear to be any notes in S-001 & S-101 (PDF Page 23 & 24) on mitigating the issue surrounding the grey water tank. Does the VA want the contractor to remove this greywater tank, or find a way to replace it using a tank that is sealed and will not off-gas harmful chemicals into the surrounding area? | Only work described in the Statement of Work should be included. Work described in the Assessment is not part of the Statement of Work. The Assessmnet is for reference only. | ||
| 114 | PDF Page 10-17 identify a series of deficiencies in B159. Of those items listed, some of the deficiencies are not related to concrete repair. One such item(s) are the missing bracing rods at the top of the building, depicted on Figure 23 on PDF Page 16 of 24. There is no reference to installing new bracing rods in S-001 & S-101 and this item does not appear to affect this project. | |||
| a. | Does the VA want the contractor to repair all concrete, all columns (both square and round), concrete curbs, and mitigate all issues to include installing new bracing rods, as listed in PDF Pages 10-17? | |||
| b. | Does the VA intend to omit any reference to the bracing rods being included in the SOW? | Only work described in the Statement of Work should be included. Work described in the Assessment is not part of the Statement of Work. The Assessment is for reference only. |
&F Page &P Printed: &D &T
Responsibility Matrix The Project Scope of work defines who is responsible for what aspects. Definitions are listed below the table. Modify what is necessary in the scope and the description of work for each party responsible.
Level of Development for each project, per the company standard, is LOD 300, as the ultimate objective to convey design intent and produce construction documentation. However, depending on the scope, budget, schedule, and the team assembled to execute the project, it may be necessary to complete a Model Element LOD Breakdown worksheet to create a detailed plan of the elements to either be modeled or excluded from modeling for this project, depending on which is more expedient. BIM Use Chart - What is BIM being used to accomplish on this project.
Remove items from this chart that are doing being done utilizing a Building Information Modeling process on this project. If an entire column is not being used (i.e. Operations), remove that whole column as necessary.
*It is important to define the final "Model" delivery to the owner at the end of the project. The simplist is to provide the owner with the individual deisgn models and invidual construction models, along with a Navisworks coordinated full design/construction model. Understand how the owner plans to use the models and keep them updated.
Also note that creation of a fully updated, as-built project model can be very expensive to create. If required, meet with the project manager and the BIM manager to discuss how best to accomplish this deliverable.
| Project Scope | Description of Work | Responsible Party | Scope | Planning | Design | Construction | Operations |
| Site | Benchmark, Design, CD's | Civil Engineer Consultant | Model Creation | Laser Scan Existing Conditions | Architectural | Building Enclosure | Energy, Control, and Facility Management |
| Landscape | Existing and New site and element creation, Design, CD's | ACG | Site Layout | Civil | Framing and Drywall | Record Update* | |
| Structure | Model Creation, Analysis, Design, CD's Shop drawings, Model Coordination | Programming Options | Mechanical | Mechanical | As-Built Update | ||
| Architecture | Existing and New Building Model Creation, LEED Evaluation, Design, CD's, Model Coordination, Record Drawings | ACG | Existing Building Modeling | Electrical | Electrical |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .