697DCK-25-R-00100 Amendment 0002.pdf
PDF 590 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Water Intrusion Mitigation Project- Miami Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT), Miami, FL 33122
- Solicitation number
- 697DCK-25-R-00100
About this file
This is Amendment 0002 to RFP 697DCK-25-R-00100 for the MIA ATCT Water Intrusion Mitigation Project, containing questions and answers from vendors and the government's responses. The amendment addresses detailed technical questions about various aspects of the work scope, including roof materials, sealant replacement, pressure washing requirements, and repair specifications across multiple building areas including the Simulator Lab Building, Old Link Structure, Base Building Roof, and Air Traffic Control Tower.
Key clarifications include: pressure washing is not required for roof areas but is required for vertical surfaces, the existing roof membrane type may be TPO or granule surfaced cap sheet, no bid bond is required as the project is under $100,000, and structural repairs are generally not included in scope except for surface corrosion removal on RTU-3. The scope is limited to specific sealant replacements, membrane repairs, and water intrusion mitigation measures as detailed in the original SOW. RTU shutdown must be coordinated with CORs, and any additional work beyond the defined scope would require contract modifications.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
2 1 22 5
5 100
1 22 5
Mitigation
No other changes or updates added.
1 22 5
697DCK-25-R-00100- MIA ATCT Water Intrusion publish the Government's responses to Vendors' RFIs.
x
1. Simulator Lab Building Does the scope of work include pressure washing the roof area? No, the scope of work does not include pressure washing the roof area.
Paint delamination observed at the stem wall. Should we include this item in the scope of work? Painting of the stem wall is not included in the scope, but do pressure wash all the vertical surfaces, including the stem wall, and replace sealant between the stem wall and the precast concrete wall.
2. Old Link Structure
Should we include sealant replacement at this curtain wall section? The upper section of the curtain wall is not included in the scope of work. We believe the water intrusion comes from the roof.
3. Old Link and Old ATCT Roofs
Could you please provide the manufacturer of single-ply TPO roof membrane if applicable? The manufacturer of the existing membrane is unknown to us at this time.
Does the metal drip edge need to be replaced in addition to the counterflashing? Yes, the metal drip edge is included in the estimated 50 ft of "flashing" to be replaced as depicted in figure 6 of the SOW.
4. Base Building Roof
Please confirm if we can install a cap sheet granule surface cap sheet in lieu of the TPO roof membrane. The intent is to us the same type of membrane as the exiting roof. If it is cap sheet granule surface, by all means, the patches should be cap sheet granule surface.
5. Base Building Roof
Sealant at the adjacent areas of the door at the hard surface to bottom wall transition appears to be deteriorated and/or missing. Should we include new sealant at these locations? If so, please confirm the extent of new sealant to be added at this transition.
Leak appears to be starting at the control joint of the stem to pre-cast walls.
Should we include sealant replacement of the control joints on the interior face of the wall?
The scope of work is limited to the sealant around the door frame (metal to concrete joints). The scope of does not include sealant between the different concrete surfaces in the area. We appreciate the observations and may include the suggestions in a future project.
6. The SOW Section A details the replacement of sealant around the exterior of the Simulator Lab Building:
a. Is this to include removing the HVAC Bardt Unit Sealant mounted to the exterior wall (looks to be newly installed)? Yes, the scope includes all the sealant around the simulator lab.
7. The SOW Section B details the Old Link structure Door Threshold leaking:
a. A site visit detailed a one-inch gap under the threshold, will the underside require a vapor barrier prior to the application of the sealant? The scope of work does not include a vapor barrier.
b. The site visit did not detail a direct area of the leak, was there a specific area the water entered the facility? There may be multiple leaks under the threshold and curtain wall; therefore, the scope of work requires resealing it all.
8. The SOW First Floor East side windows did not show visual imperfections to the exterior sealant:
a. Can the FAA complete a water test to the windows detailing specific areas of leakage? There are no plans to conduct a water test.
b. The window did not have exposed weep holes for water drainage, is an original submittal or window detail available for review? No shop drawings are available from original construction contract. We don’t believe the windows contain weep holes.
9. The RTU-3 inspection reflected significant deficiencies to the exterior base rail and structural framing:
a. Is the exterior of the RTU-3 and structural tie down to be repaired or patched by the FAA or is this item a responsibility of the contractor?
The scope includes a requirement to remove surface corrosion. Any other structural work is not part of the scope.
b. Can the RTU-3 be shutdown and inspected by the contractor Mechanical team to thoroughly inspect the interior of the AHU? The RTU may be shut down during construction activities. Shutdown shall be coordinated with the CORs.
c. If the tie down is to be repaired by contractor is a structural engineer required for approval? The scope of this project does not include any structural work.
10. The SOW Section F details the ATCT First Floor emergency exit door but upon site visit the area sustained significant water damage on the interior:
a. Is the contractor to repair the interior stairwell areas that sustained water damage? The scope of the project does not include any stairwell repair.
b. The source of the water intrusion was inconclusive during the site visit, can the FAA confirm the sealant on the upper level between the dissimilar structures is not the cause of the water entry point? The scope of section 1.f. includes replacement of the sealant around the first level door frame. It doesn’t include any upper-level joints.
11. The SOW section G details the lower-level skylight which during the site visit details trapped water under the roof flashing area:
a. Can the FAA confirm the roof around the skylight is TPO as visual inspection reflected a MOD bed? FAA engineers identified this roof membrane as TPO. It has been suggested that it may be granule surfaced cap sheet. The intent to use the same type of membrane as the current membrane.
b. Is the contractor to remove the entire flashing around the skylight as the SOW details removing trapped water only? The scope specifies removal of trapped water only. If the COR determines that we need to replace the flashing, we will need to modify the contract to include the flashing replacement.
12. The SOW section C details repairing 20 points throughout the 2nd level roof of the ATCT:
a. Is the roof a TPO application as the visual inspection during the site visit reflected MOD bed? FAA engineers identified this roof membrane as TPO. It has been suggested that it may be granule surfaced cap sheet. The intent to use the same type membrane as the current membrane.
b. The TPO Roof located on the immediate exit of the ATCT had significant delamination, is this to be addressed within this bid process? The scope includes a maximum of 20 TPO patches under Section 1.c as determined by the FAA COR, all of them in the area of the Old ATCT and Old Link. The area of the new ATCT is not included in the scope of this project.
13. Is a bid bond required for this project as the value threshold in below $100.000? No, it is not required for this action.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .