Questions and Answers RFQ 459544 3_17_2025.pdf

Procurement & Property Management Division

P.O. Box 5000

Upton, NY 11973-5000 Phone 631-344-4605 kkirkenda@bnl.gov

Managed by Brookhaven Science Associates for the U.S. Department of Energy www.bnl.gov

March 17, 2025

Questions and Answers RFQ 459544

1. The Quotation Pricing Sheet (Enclosure B) appears to be for “Commissioning

Services.” Other than Review of Commissioning Plans as part of CMa scope of work, we anticipate no role in Commissioning. Please confirm this is the correct format for our Fee Proposal.

A. Enclosure C is the Quotation pricing sheet. The deliverable as noted in the statement of work is ‘Review of Project Commissioning Plan’. This RFQ is limited to pre-construction services. No commissioning activities, only plan review.

2. Please clarify how the Alternates (Additive and Deduct) are to be priced by the CMa;

(i.e. the CMa’s staffing costs). Will the Cost Estimates and Schedules both require revision by CMa staff? Is it acceptable to assume that the Alternates will be priced after the 90% Cost Estimate is completed or concurrently with the 90% Cost Estimate process?

A. Currently there are two add alternatives detail in the Div.01 specifications. The schedule and estimate should reflect these to the best of the CMa’s ability concurrently for any alternatives (Additive and Deduct).

3. Please clarify the approximate size (number) of the initial 90% Detailed Design drawings.

A. It is estimated to be 900-1100 pages in the 90% detailed design drawing set.

Specifications are estimated to have 1600-1800 pages.

4. Considering the size of this program and the requisite elements to be Cost

Estimated, the level of detail required and site complexities, we believe a realistic duration for the 90% Cost Estimate is closer to (8-12) weeks for this effort. Would extending the time for the 90% Cost Estimate be considered?

A. No change to the deliverable schedule is being considered.

5. Given project schedule and duration for the 90% Cost Estimate preparation, please advise if after (NTP issued), the 60% design documents can be provided as a resource for the estimating team to become familiar with the project (this assumes

90% drawings will not be provided on Day-1).

A. Yes, 60% design documents can be provided at NTP.

6. Please advise if prior to the 90% documents being issued, the CMa may mobilize their Senior Estimating, Scheduling, Constructability Review staff to plan and prepare for the full 90% Design Submission.

A. Upon NTP, the CMa may proceed in this manner.

7. Please clarify the projected dates for the 90% and 100% drawing submissions to be provided; as 4/4/25 and 6/4/25 would likely be impacted by the date of this CMa

Proposal Submission date of 3/31/25 and an actual NTP for the selected firm would likely be well beyond the 4/4/25 date.

A. Projected submission dates for the 90% and 100% design drawings remain the same, 4/4/25 and 6/4/25 respectively.

8. Please clarify if the intention is for Construction to proceed in Phases; or will total access to the site be provided to the eventual selected Construction Contractor? If there are phases to the physical work this will likely impact both projected costs and the schedule.

A. Construction will proceed in phases.

9. Section 4.7 of the SOW states that (1) Schedule is required; please clarify if the intent is to break down the Schedule into multiple schedules based on Bid Packages, Phases etc.

A. Section 4.7.1. states that ‘Preparation of one (1) detailed construction schedule based on the 90% Detailed Design Documents and preparation of one (1) detailed construction schedule based on the 100% Detailed Design

Documents’. In section 6 – Deliverables, items numbered 5 & 8 reflect the schedules required.

Section 4.7.1.b states that ‘The CPM schedule shall reflect the project phasing and priorities as directed by BSA and as impacted by the availability of construction funds’. The project will employ a tailoring strategy and the CMa will work with BSA to develop a CPM schedule. This is not multiple schedules but a schedule with the appropriate WBS to capture bid packages and availability of construction funds, resulting in construction phases.

10. Section 4.7 d of the SOW states that CMa shall identify Bid Packages to complete the work. Will this be an early required action in order to align the Cost Estimates with the Bid Package Strategy? Otherwise, the 90% Cost Estimate may not reflect the proposed Bid Package Strategy, developed during the Scheduling Phase.

A. Yes, to accurately inform the cost estimates the Bid Package Strategy shall be coordinated with BSA and the CMa at the early stage of these deliverables.

11. If Cost and Resource loading of the P6 Schedule is required, please define the maximum duration for resource loading (i.e. for each work activity).

A. Maximum duration is 25 calendar days.

12. Section 1.2 of the SOW states that utility maps are available but that the selected firm will be responsible for “due-diligence field verification.” Please clarify if the field verification is CMa task or another firm. If CMa task, when will this be performed?

A. This falls under the constructability review, due-diligence field verification shall consist of desktop utility reviews and site assessments.

13. Section 1.3 of the SOW Proposed Budget is $305M using 2022 dollars; has the budget been escalated to account for market changes in the (3) years since then, to 2025 dollars; prior to the start of Bidding and Construction?

A. Proposed Budget remains the same. It is understood that deliverables will use current data.

14. The SOW states under Section 1.3 additive/deduct alternates may be proposed in the range of (8- 12) total. Are these to be Estimated by the CMa as part of their scope of work? If so, when will this be performed? Will drawings be issued for each additive/deduct alternate to assist in the pricing?

A. Additive/deduct alternates will be detailed in the specifications and estimates are required. No drawings will be provided.

15. There are critical infrastructure components for both temporary and permanent support that are indicated, ie, vibration, heating and cooling, RHIC, cut over capacities. Does the current budget include the ancillary support of existing services and buildings required to integrate this project?

A. Ancillary support of existing services and buildings and considered ‘off project’ dependances and not part of the current infrastructure budget.

16. Have settlement surveys, construction stabilization, or provisions for future tie-in scope of existing been performed? There will need to be an extensive effort to understand “how” this project will integrate into the existing program while keeping the existing program operational. An example is current capacity of electrical service from main utility provider or water capacity and pressure for fire protection services.

A. Structural analysis of the tunnel penetrations has been performed, along with water and electricity studies.

17. Are there any known site issues that require mitigation? Such as soil contamination, endangered species, protected land, contaminated water, etc. If so these will need to be addressed during design and construction.

A. Land use, environmental and rare & endangered species items have been documented, and work will be planned accordingly.

18. Under preconstruction services there are both constructability and estimating required.

Has the infrastructure support been identified and confirmed able to include temporary and permanent loads? If not, will this be accounted for in the WBS 6.11.02, 6.11.03, and 6.11.04?

A. Temporary and permanent loads are being coordinated. Constraints if found by the CMa can be identified in the constructability review reports.

19. To what extent have the funds been appropriated from DOE? Has the design been fully funded? Has this RFP been fully funded? To what extent do we need to look at the incremental funding on an annual basis? Exclude design and CMa services? Include construction to a certain value? In order to keep the schedule – we will need to see the proposed funding profile immediately upon NTP.

A. CMa Services as fully funded, as with Design. Construction has not yet been funded by DOE. The RFQ Letter also includes an anticipated period of performance.

20. If developed, please provide a list of Long Lead items with preliminary Lead Times.

A. This has not been developed.

21. Are Lead times available for any Long Lead Equipment?

A. See response to question 20.

22. Have separate Procurement Specifications been developed (and completed) for each of the Long Lead /Major Equipment items? Or Specs are provided in the AIA/Masterspec

Format? Will Div 00 and Div 01 Sections need to be added?

A. No procurement specifications have been developed. These are not being considered currently.

23. Does BNL intend to purchase the Long Lead equipment/elements in full? Provide a down-payment and consign the balance of the PO to the contractor?

A. BSA can purchase long lead equipment if identified and approved. Contractor payments would adhere to their contract documents.

24. Have equipment quotes been provided for any of the Long Lead Equipment items?

A. No equipment quotes have been provided.

25. Is there a definition for what the 90% set of documents is to include? Level of completeness? Difference in levels of completeness depending upon the discipline?

A. For the purposes of this RFQ, the 90% set Is the set that will be transmitted to the CMa based on the anticipated A/E deliverable date of 4/4/25. Its level of completeness has already evolved from the 30% and 60% design submittals and reviews. The CMa shall provide their professional judgement on the level of completeness however some disciplines may be further ahead than others.

26. The Constructability reviews are cited to provide ”…… facilitates ease of construction, and to assess construction processes from start to finish to identify obstacles, minimize or prevent errors or delays, minimize costs, and maximize value to the EIC.”

a. Is the last portion intended to be a “Value Engineering” effort?

A. Value engineering is not intended to be part of the Construability review.

Cost effectiveness is intended to be a result of the Constructability Review

– to avoid costly changes in construction.

b. Are these reviews intended to address constructability and maintainability only?

A. Intent is not limited to these two categories, see Section 4.5.

27. Will the review team receive the Revit model for review of “Clash Detection” and other coordination purposes?

A. Yes. These models will be shared after NTP.

28. The SOW appears to only cite DOE [Federal] standards. Was this project designed in accordance with the United Facilities Codes (UFC) or any other Federal

Governmental Standards other than DOE?

A. See Section 2 of the SoW for - Applicable Codes, Rules and Regulations.

29. The RFQ letter requests offerors provide information as it relates to their previous experience to meet contractual requirements in both A. Project Experience, and B. Past

Performance. Please clarify if overlapping experience on projects is acceptable in both

A and B.

A. No overlapping for B. Past performance.

30. Regarding Key Personnel, the RFQ letter describes at least one Project Manager, Estimator, Scheduler, and Project Engineer. However, the SOW includes an additional position of “Analyst” under 4.1 CMa Pre-Construction Support Services Team, please clarify if this is also a Key Personnel position, and if so, please provide their education and experience requirements

A. It is anticipated that an Analyst would be required to assist with BIM reviews and coordinating with the CMa team for the deliverables and noted as needed. No education and experience requirements are specified to qualify.

31. In order to allow sufficient time to respond to offeror questions, and for offerors to incorporate answers into our quotations, please consider a two week extension of the submission deadline.

A. No time extension is being considered currently

32. What is BNL’s vision of the Analyst and Project Engineer duties during the Pre-

Construction stage?

A. It is anticipated that an Analyst would be required to assist with BIM reviews and coordinating with the CMa team for the deliverables and noted as needed. No education and experience requirements are specified to qualify. See Section 2.1.C for the RFQ letter for the Project Engineer qualifications. It is anticipated that the

Project Engineer will have significant input to each deliverable, as their experience will provide sound and disciplined guidance at this pre-construction stage.

33. Can BNL please provide a list of the current design drawings (sheet index)?

A. No drawings are being provided as part of this RFQ. For reference it is estimated to be 900-1100 pages in the 90% detailed design drawing set.

34. The scope of work notes the utilization of BIM. What is the associated BIM standards and BIM-specific tasks for these later stages of the design?

A. Use of BIM best practices and professional quality is the responsibility of the

CMa. See Section 5. BIM models by the A/E for EIC infrastructure will be shared with the CMa upon NTP, these will be used to inform constructability review reports. CMa is not responsible for design.