Responses_to_Industry's_RFIs_5-4-2018.pdf

Elevator Modernization Project at Ted Weiss Federal Office Building at 290 Broadway

47PC0318R0004

RFI Responses as of 4/26/18

For RFI Responses 1-6, please see Amendment 0002 to the solicitation.

For RFI Responses 7-10, please see Amendment 0003 to the solicitation.

For RFI Responses 11-33, Please see Amendment 0004 to the solicitation.

For RFI Responses 34-48, Please see Amendment 0005 to the solicitation.

RFI49: Re: "I am a little confused about the requirement for a full time QEI inspector. Presumably they would be responsible to perform the testing of each elevator as the modernization is completed for that elevator. What would be the value or benefit of having a QEI inspector there at all times. Please clarify that a QEI inspector is only required full time during the actual testing of each elevator.

Also, please clarify that a CET Elevator Technician is acceptable for the installation of the elevator."

Response49: "QEI is required as needed; included but not limited to all major inspections, and testing of each elevator.

All Key Personnel must comply with the criteria listed in the solicitation.

RFI50: Below is the reference to flooring in the spec. Just to clarify a previous RFI regarding flooring, what does it mean to work with the building owner to provide flooring options? Does it mean that anything that is done would be a change order?

Response50: See previous answer to RFI 37. No, a change order is not anticipated.

RFI51: Re: RTU

The specified RTU does not come broken down and the specifications do not allow a substitution. Can an alternate unit be used?

Response51: The note #13 on Drawing M-002 “No Substitutions Permitted,” is a typo, please delete.

Alternate product may be accepted, if it is proven to be “Equal or Better” product.

Note that the specification section 237413 lists (3) manufactures.

RFI52: Re: RTU

QUESTION (S):

1. Are local permits required for this project?

Resp

Response52: Work that is associated with Fire Life Safety may require local permits. It is the duty of the contractor to make sure they comply with all local and federal jurisdictions as applicable.

RFI53: We have been notified by our HVAC sub-contractors they cannot price the HVAC work as the specified supplier for the rooftop AC unit cannot meet the specifications for this unit. I contacted them personally and Daikin said they cannot meet the current spec’s and they have engineers working on it but they don’t know when they will be able to price. As a result no HVAC subs cannot price this either. I even spoke with Kone and they are having the same problem. This is not a price that anyone can take a guess at.

We are requesting a bid postponement to give Daikin time to work the engineering of this unit out and get all of us a proper price. If you need to contact Daikin Direct to verify this the contact is Roberta “Tooty” Bode – 201 395 3750. Please advise if we can get an extension on this bid.

Response53: The bid due date has been extended to May 10, 2018 at 2pm.

RFI54: Sebastian and Lisa – Please see Daikin’s response below – They are still waiting for and addendum to be issued by the Architect GC Eng. after they receive this it will take at least a few days for Daikin to price.

Daikin is the specified supplier for this unit so no potential bidders can submit a bid the project without this price. We are again asking that you please extend the bid one week or we will not be able to submit a price.

Response54: See previous answer to RFI 51.

RFI55: Sebastian and Lisa – Please see below the response from our other HVAC contractor. Please advise regarding our request for bid extension based on the fact that our HVAC subs cannot price because Daikin is waiting for an addendum to be issued from the architect. This is a major and costly component of the HVAC system that was spec’d and we cannot submit a bid without this price.

Response55: See previous answer to RFI 51.

RFI56: We want to bring to your attention information that has been given to us by the RTU manufacturer.

The manufacturer states that the Roof Top Unit is not a knockdown unit and cannot be disassembled into smaller pieces to carry in and be reassembled. Without access through existing openings in the building (the roof hatch opening is not large enough) an external rig will be required.

RFI Responses 7 and 8 state that "the contractor is responsible to determine the Means and Methods" and that "exterior rigging is not recommended". Under the circumstances, if the GSA does not recommend an external rig and the unit cannot fit through the roof hatch we believe that the GSA must make a clarification.

Response 56: GSA has confirmed with the manufacturers that the unit can be disassembled.

Additionally, Alternate product may be accepted, if it is proven to be “Equal or Better” product.

RFI57: Sebastian and Lisa – see the email from one of our HVAC subcontractors. Daikin cannot price without further information from the architect.We are being held up with equipment pricing issue with Daikin.

I am told the architect has not released a revision for this project.

Secondly, there seems to be some issue with the specified controls contractor.

We are requesting an extension to assure that we have the proper information on this project before we release our quotation.

Response57: The bid due date has been extended to May 10, 2018 at 2PM.

https://maps.google.com/?q=290+Broadway&entry=gmail&source=g