Amendment 0004.pdf

AMENDMENT NO. 0004 TO SOLICITATION NO.

70Z04720RSTAPON00 IS ISSUED ONLY TO THOSE OFFERORS

UNDER THE REGIONAL MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION

IDIQ CONTRACT (RMACC), REGION 7, USCG DEPARTMENT OF

HOMELAND SECURITY

THE DUE DATE FOR PROPOSALS (MAR 31, 2020) REMAINS UNCHANGED.

TASK ORDER ANNOUNCEMENT NO. 70Z04720RSTAPON00 IS AMENDED

AS FOLLOWS:

THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS WERE RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE

SOLICITATION:

1. QUESTION: Specification Section 01110, Option Item No. 1 calls for the “Repair

Existing Groin”. Section 01800, GROIN (OPTION ITEM No. 1) 1.8.9 states “The

Contractor shall assume the existing concrete piles require minor repair, but do not require major restoration or replacement”. However, if the vertical H-piles are not repairable or would be more cost-effective to remove the existing piles and replace with a new piles, are the new piles required to be a similar or identical design and materials?

ANSWER: Restoration of the original function is the top priority. If site conditions render the pile unrepairable and unable such that functionality cannot be restored and require pile replacement], this would constitute a changed site condition.

2. QUESTION: Specification Section 01800, 1.8.1.5.1. First sentence states …. The

South Bulkhead is 421-foot long ….” Is that supposed to be 245-feet long?

ANSWER: The bulkhead area of work is 245 feet from STA 0+00 to 2+45. There is

NO work from STA 2+45 to 4+21. It should be noted that the total length of the bulkhead facing south along the boat basin is 421 feet.

3. QUESTION: Specification Section 01800, 1.4.1.1 Topography mentions that the survey was attached. Is this referring to the Record Drawings, dated 7/1/91? If so, is a more recent survey and if so please provide?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment 0002 dated Feb-19-2020. As part of that

Amendment there is a topographic survey by Tetra Tech dated Feb-10-2020.

4. QUESTION: The Waterfront Inspection Report (Appendix D) recommends the replacement of the western bulkhead sheet-pile. BASE BID states the “Repair Existing

Bulkhead”. Is the term “Bulkhead” inclusive of the sheet-pile, concrete cap and anchor tie-rods?

ANSWER: Appendix D is provided for information only. The RFP scope of repairs to the bulkhead between STA 0+00 and STA 2+45 are defined within RFP

Specification Section 01800-1.8 STRUCTURAL DESIGN. The sheet-pile and tie-rod repair and replacement are not part of the project scope.

5. QUESTION: Please confirm that this Scope of Work does not include the replacement of the sheet-pile and is only for the repair of the bulkhead sheets (between STA 0+00 and

2+45) in the BASE BID.

ANSWER: Replacement of the sheet-pile bulkhead between STA 0+00 and STA

2+45 is not included in the project scope.

6. QUESTION: There was no mention of the condition of the anchor tie-rods between

STA 0+00 and 2+45. Is there any additional information on the condition of the tie-rods?

If so please provide. Is the replacement of the tie-rods included in the BASE BID?

ANSWER: Replacement of the tie-rods between STA 0+00 and STA 2+45 is not included in the project scope. All available information on the condition of the waterfront elements is provided within the Waterfront Inspection Report.

7. QUESTION: Has there been any dredging immediately waterward of the bulkhead between STA 0+00 and 2+45? If so, are there any hydrographic surveys of the bay bottom within 25-feet of the bulkhead that can be provided? Why is there a 25-foot offset from the bulkhead that dredging is prohibited as indicated on the post-dredge survey performed by the USACE, dated 12/11/18?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment 0002 dated Feb-19-2020. A hydrographic survey dated Feb-02-2020 is included in that amendment. This hydrographic survey extends to the edge of the bulkhead and includes a significant section of the Indian

River. The last boat basin dredging was in 2018 by the Army Corp. As a matter of policy the USACE avoids dredging within 25 feet of bulkheads.

8. QUESTION: Is the US Coast Guard proposing a 16’ (width) outer L-Head, 10’ (width) connector dock, and 10’ (width) interior dock?

ANSWER: The layout and arrangement shall meet or exceed the minimum requirement, however, the exact layout shall be determined by the DOR. The RFP drawings provide a conceptual layout. The floating dock module connected to gangway shall have a minimum width of 10’-0’. All other floating dock modules shall have a minimum width of 6’-0.

9. QUESTION: Will the optional roof (#2) use the floating dock mooring pile as the mounting and support structure?

ANSWER: The roof of the covered mooring shall be structural supported by piling.

The covered mooring shall be independent of the floating dock.

10. QUESTION: Will the US Coast Guard accept ½” x 16” Steel Pipe Pile for the floating dock structure? Due to option #2. The proposed roof could potentially require up to a 24” x 24” prestressed square concrete pile to support the wind and weight loads.

ANSWER: The DOR shall be responsible for the design and shall ensure all design requirements are identified, met, and an optimal solution provided.

11. QUESTION: Specification Section 1.11.2.12 Fuel Distribution Piping & Leak

Detection System

This section calls for a stainless steel primary pipe with a fiberglass reinforced plastic coated secondary. In addition this section states; the system shall be manufactured to allow the placement of the leak detection cable in the secondary containment. “Tricon

Marine Piping” does not have an EQ # from The Florida Department of Environmental

Protection for approved Piping over the water. Attachment PMC -20-2017 (6 pages) is a copy of the approved Piping over the water per FLDEP. Tricon is not on the approval list! Petroleum Marine Construction is submitting for approval an alternate piping.

Attachment PMC -20-2018 (4 pages) Omegaflex brochure

- FLDEP EQ # 751 (Florida DEP approval for Piping over Water) Omegaflex Double

Trac has a 316 stainless steel primary pipe within an Engineered Fluoropolymer (EFEP) as a secondary containment barrier which is UV stable.

- Leak Detection cable would be excluded. The Tank Leak Detection System stated within 1.11.2.9.1 can be expanded to include the fuel piping onshore and over the water monitoring the secondary containment sumps for all transitions per PEI/RP-1000 and the dispenser sumps.

ANSWER: The fuel dispensers will be located along the bulkhead (on land). These dispensers will be used to fuel the boats. Fuel piping shall NOT be installed under or along the floating dock. Fuel Piping shall conform to SECTION 01800 – 1.11

PLUMBING Part 1.11.2.12.1, Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Distribution Piping.

12: QUESTION: Specification Section 1.11.2.9 Fuel Storage Tank & Drawings provided

M2261-D

Section requests a new 275 gallon waste oil tank. Per drawings a vaulted tank is required

Convault* the leading manufacturer of vaulted tanks does not make a 275 gallon concrete fuel storage tank

A 250 gallon tank is available or a 500 gallon tank is available.

Which capacity tank would the USCG like for Petroleum marine Construction to quote for Waste Oil storage?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0003 dated March 05, 2020.

END OF AMENDMENT

FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AMENDMENTS MAY BE CAUSE OF

REJECTION OF OFFER.