70Z04722RCHARLTN00_Amendment 0011.pdf

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

DESIGN-BUILD CHARLESTON PIER PAPA RECAPITALIZATION, USCG BASE CHARLESTON, CHARLESTON SC

(SEE CONTINUTATION SHEET)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

PAGE OF PAGES

1 22

5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE NA Contracting Division USCG, Facilities Design and Construction Center 5505 Robin Hood Road, Suite K Norfolk, VA 23513-243

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

70Z04722RCHARLTN00

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12/10/2021

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

(X)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER

NA

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

3/15/2022

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PROJECT NUMBER: FY19_15182879

TITLE: ReCAP Pier Papa, Sector Charleston, SC

AMENDMENT NUMBER: 0011

SOLICITATION NO.: 70Z04722RCHARLTN00 IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:

TASK ORDER ANNOUNCEMENT:

NO ADDITIONAL RFIs WILL BE ACCEPTED/ANSWERED. OFFEORORS ARE

INSTRUCTED TO PROVIDE THEIR BEST OFFEROR BASED ON THE TOA AND

ALL AMENDMENTS.

1. RFI # ( 203, 204, 205, 409 )

Section 01110, para 1.8.3.

DELETE: “This gate currently is unmanned and lacks a guard house to support a security watch. Contractor is to provide a temporary guard house at the Hobson Ave gate and provide for security and access at that gate.”

ADD: N/A

2. RFI # (225)

Section 01800, para 1.8.1.2 (third bullet) DELETE: “The new pier shall be capable of providing three single NSC berths and one nested NSC berth for two NSCs.”

ADD: “The new pier shall be capable of providing four NSC single NSC berths (base bid) and one nested NSC (optional bid item), as shown in the RFP drawings.”

3. RFI # (114)

Section 01800, para 1.8.1.2 (second bullet) DELETE: Second sentence of second bullet, “Refer to RFP Drawings for the conceptual demolition limits of the bulkhead.”

ADD: N/A

4. RFI # (112 , 124, 256, 273, 330, and 331)

Section 01800, para 1.19.5

DELETE: N/A

ADD: ‘Dredge Material and quantities are independent of artificial material and released aggregate or debris.’

5. RFI # (112 , 124, 256, 273, 330, and 331)

Section 01800, para 1.19.6 DELETE: The Government has knowledge of existing the location of wreckage and other material near the blown out bulkhead that will require additional or different equipment than standard dredging equipment for removal.

ADD: ‘The Government has knowledge of items waterside of the original (blown out) bulkhead that will require additional or different equipment than standard dredging equipment for removal. This includes three pieces of submerged equipment; an excavator, a Bobcat and a generator. For bidding purposes, assume that the excavator has a weight of 77,000 pound. This includes 30,000 cubic yards of released aggregate and soils with characteristic that are not consistent with dredge soils in RFP Specification 01800-1.19.5 This includes, approximately 375-linear feet of missing bulkhead, bulkhead cap, and tie-backs. Drawings of the missing bulkhead system are not available. For bidding purposes, assume the bulkhead is of the same construction as the bulkhead to the south.’

1.8.6.6.1 Gangway-NSC Connection: Gangways shall have a quick release connection at the NSC flight level deck. Permanent modification, such as welding, of the NSC vessels is not permitted. Include casters at the end of the brow.

6. RFI # (345)

Section 01800, para 1.8.6.6.1 DELETE: “Gangway-NSC Connection: Gangways shall have a quick release connection at the NSC flight level deck. Permanent modification, such as welding, of the NSC vessels is not permitted. Include casters at the end of the brow.”

ADD: “Gangway-NSC Connection: Gangways shall have a quick release connection at the vertical railing stations NSC flight level deck. Permanent modification, such as welding, of the NSC vessels is not permitted.”

7. RFI # (346)

Section 01800, para 1.8.16.6.2 DELETE: “Include casters at the end of the brow.”

ADD: “Include casters or wheels at the end of the brow.

8. RFI # (439)

Section Amendment 0009 01800, para 1.13.12.1.3 DELETE: “Each vessel load is estimated to be approximated 350KVA (500KVA with allowable tolerances). 4 NSC vessel are estimated to be 2,000KVA total. 2500KVA of load with the optional fifth (5th) NSC.”

ADD: “Each vessel requires four (4) 400A 480V, 3-phase, connections.”.

9. RFI # ( 431 )

TOA , Factor 2 DELTE: 5 pages ADD: 10 Pages

10. RFI # (435)

Section 01800, para 1.18.5.2.5 DELETE: ‘For dredge spoils generated during required dredging activities, the Contractor shall assume that dredge spoils will be allowed for disposal at a USACE disposal facility/cell in the Charleston, SC area and will bid the project accordingly. ’ ADD: ‘For bidding purposes, assume that all dredged material could be disposed of at the USACE’s Clouter Creek upland disposal facility. A variation in the actual approved disposal site would be managed as a changed site condition.’

Section 01800, para 1.19.11

DELETE: N/A

ADD: ‘For bidding purposes, assume that all dredged material could be disposed of at the USACE’s Clouter Creek upland disposal facility. A variation in the actual approved disposal site would be managed as a changed site condition.’

11. RFI # (438)

Section 01800, para 1.18.5.2.5 DELETE: ‘The Contractor shall provide a cost per ton disposal rate for contaminated soils and materials as part of the bid schedule. For bidding purposes, assume that up to 1,500 tons of contaminated upland soils and material may be generated.. ’

ADD: ‘Bidders shall provide both a per-ton disposal rate (valid for up to 1,500 tons) and a line item for bidding purposes that assumes the full 1,500 tons. The Contractor will be reimbursed for the actual tons disposed of (up to 1,500 tons) at the proposed rate per ton. If actual disposal needs exceed 1,500 tons, then the unit cost for disposal of the additional waste will be managed as a changed site condition.’

Bid Schedule

DELETE:

‘Upland Contaminated Soils and Materials for Disposal $ / ton (up to 1,500 tons)’

ADD:

‘Dispose of 1500 Tons of Upland Contaminated Soils and Materials: $ _________ ($______/ton)’

END OF AMENDMENT

FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AMENDMENTS MAY BE CAUSE OF REJECTION

OF OFFER

No. Rcv REFERENCE

QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

Pg Section Paragraph

90 1/27/2022

Drawing No.

C-111

The dredge prism shown on the RFP drawings does not extend across the entire length of the failed bulkhead. However, the RFP does require removal of all structural elements of the failed bulkhead and removal of aggregate to -20 MLLW.

Per these requirements the design dredge depth the new bulkhead must accommodate in locations outside of this project’s remains undefined. Please clarify the depth of future dredging the replacement bulkhead shall be designed to accommodate. (Please note, this RFI differs from our previous RFI #15)

The Coast Guard’s plan for future maintenance dredging is to elevation –32' plus 2' over depth in MLLW datum, as provided in Amendment 009, RFI Question 108.

112 2/1/2022

Specification Section 01800, Paragraph

1.1.1 states “removal of uncontaminated underwater released aggregate to a depth of -20’MLLW” as part of the project description. Please provide a quantity of underwater released aggregate for bidding purposes.

See Amendment 011.

114 2/1/2022

Specification Section 01800, Paragraph

1.8.1.2 refers to the RFP drawings for the conceptual demolition limits of the bulkhead, however, the RFP drawings do not show the conceptual demolition limits. Please provide.

See Amendment 011.

124 2/1/2022

Drawing C-111 Per note 2 on drawing sheet C-111 please provide a summary of types and quantities of debris - concrete, sheet piles, aggregate, appurtenances, etc. -from the failed section of bulkhead that are to be considered for the basis of bids. See Amendment 011.

154 2/3/22

SECTION 01800_DESIGN-BUILD

CRITERIA PARAGRAPHS 1.13

ELECTRICAL, Paragraph 1.13

ELECTRICAL 1.13.1.1

SECTION 01800_DESIGN-BUILD

CRITERIA PARAGRAPHS 1.13

ELECTRICAL, Paragraph 1.13 ELECTRICAL 1.13.1.1 States that electrical service is presently provided by Dominion Energy. And further states: “Investigate connection point for electrical utility in manhole located at base of the existing pier November.

Determine whether the utility service provided at this location is suitable for the requirements and demand of the new pier. It is possible that that underground utility service is not operational. In this case, electrical utility will need to be extended from operational primary overhead lines running parallel to S. Hobson Ave, transition to underground, and extended to the site of the electrical equipment room.” Per the above statement It is not possible currently to determine the cost of the primary electrical service and primary electrical equipment.

Would the Government please verify that they will pay for all cost from Dominion Energy associated with new electrical utility service. If not and since the cost of the new electrical service cannot be determined at this time, will the Government provide an allowance?

See section 1.10 New Utility Services.

See Price Proposal Form for connection utility allowance in Amend 0009.

See Amendment 0010, RFI 425 for specifications on utility provisions in coordination with DOR.

203 2/4/22 01110 1.8.3 Section 01110 Paragraph 1.8.3 - Please provide the requirements(number of guards, certifications, etc) for the security guards that are needed to monitor the access gate?

This is no longer a requirement.

For Amendment 11:

Section 01110:

1.8.3. …Delete “This gate currently is unmanned and lacks a guard house to support a security watch. Contractor is to provide a temporary guard house at the Hobson Ave gate and provide for security and access at that gate.”

204 2/4/22

01110 1.8.3 Section 01110 Paragraph 1.8.3 –

Will the contractor need to provide 24/7 security at Hobson Ave gate?

See #203 above

205 2/4/22

01110 1.8.3 Section 01110 Paragraph 1.8.3 – Will the contractor have control of the opening and closing of the gate at Hobson Ave?

See #203 above

225 2/4/22 Specification section 1800 1.8.1.2 states three single NSC berths and one nested NSC berth for 2 NSCs.

Please clarify this should be 4 single NSC berths in base price and 1 nested berth for 1 NSC in option 1.

See Amendment 011

233 2/4/22 1800 1.8.2.2.4 Cast-in Place Concrete states all reinforcing shall be epoxy coated. Please confirm that landside building slab-on-grades and foundations do not require epoxy coated reinforcing?

1800 1.8.2.2 section is for Waterfront Structures, not Landside Structures.

Epoxy coated reinforcing bar is not an RFP requirement for building slab-on-grades and foundations.

RFP 01800 1.8.2.2.4 is specific and clear with regards to the specific Waterfront Structural cast-in-place elements that require epoxy coating reinforcing bar.

234 2/4/22 1800 1.8.2.2.4 Cast-in Place Concrete states all reinforcing shall be epoxy coated. Please confirm that the pier deck and pile caps do not require epoxy coated reinforcing.

RFP 01800 1.8.2.2.4 is specific and clear with regards to the specific Waterfront Structural cast-in-place elements that require epoxy coating reinforcing bar. Pier deck and pile caps are not listed as requiring epoxy coated reinforcing bar.

256 2/4/22 The underwater released soils/aggregate from the bulkhead failure seems to overlap with the dredging area designated on the RFP Drawings. Please confirm the 385,449 cubic yards for dredging includes this underwater released soils/aggregate from the bulkhead failure?

The 385,449 CY of dredge material does not included any released soils/aggregate.

Clarifying language is provided within Amendment 0011.

259 2/4/22 Is the quantity for the material to be removed to -30 MLLW at the bulkhead included in the overall dredge quantity of 385,449 cubic yards?

The 385,449 CY of dredge material does not included any released soils/aggregate.

Clarifying language is provided within Amendment 0011.

260 2/4/22 Please provide the inspection criteria the required assessment of the existing bulkhead to include the future maximum potential dredge depth at the bulkhead.

Inspection of the existing bulkhead is not an RFP requirement. The maximum future dredge depth see Amendment 009, RFI Question 108.

293 2/4/22 Based upon the anticipated permit procurement duration, lead times, the EA moratorium period of April through September, equipment removal at failed bulkhead, and the durations for the construction, the RFP performance period of 1125 calendar days is not sufficient.

Based upon our preliminary analysis of the required permits, the moratorium restriction, and construction durations, the RFP performance period needs to be increased by 15 months for a revised contract performance period of 1,580 calendar days.

Please provide this performance period increase as required.

So far, we have seen concluded that permits and consultations with the Navy, Fed agencies and State might be quite time consuming. We’re also advising bidders to assume that T&E species moratoriums would limit dredging to Nov- Feb timeframe (per our EA). Some review of the timeline might be warranted.

See Amendment 0010. Period of Performance has been Period of Performance: 1429 calendar days from award for the Base Items and Option Item.

295 2/4/22 We assume the project schedule needs to account for the moratorium (time of year restriction) from April through September that is included in the EA as “to be expected", the extended pier construction duration to account for concerns dealing with bubble curtains and "soft starts", and the equipment removal at the failed bulkhead. Please confirm the moratorium and these activities need to be accounted for in the project schedule. If so, the TOA performance period is not adequate and will need to be

So far, we have seen concluded that permits and consultations with the Navy, Fed agencies and State might be quite time consuming. We’re also advising bidders to assume that T&E species moratoriums would limit dredging to Nov- Feb timeframe (per our EA). Some review of the timeline might be warranted.

See Amend 00010.

extended another 15 months for a performance period of 1,580 calendar days. Please extend the performance period?

301 2/4/22 Please confirm if the Government wants the Electrical Shelter elevation to be the 100 year flood plus 2 feet which is elevation 14 feet (should this be to the bottom of the structure or the finished floor elevation (FFE)), or does it need to be based off the ASCE 24 requirements (500 year flood) that is 15 feet to the bottom of the structure making the FFE approximately 19 feet. Please clarify?

The Coast Guard requires that piers and wharves be designed to Risk Category and Flood Design Class 3. Follow the requirements of ASCE 24.

**NOTE: RFP made changes to the Flood Design Class in Amendment 010, RFI Question #336.

309 2/4/22

1.8.2.2.3 and 1.8.3

The RFP does not specifically address the design of the bulkhead under seismic load conditions.

Confirm that seismic forces does not have to be addressed/considered in the bulkhead design. If seismic forces have to be considered in the bulkhead design, the RFP specified design criteria do not provide horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient, ks, which is necessary to calculate seismic earth pressures on the bulkhead. Terracon did not include seismic earth pressure in their report. We realize this could leave room for the designer to entirely disregard seismic earth pressure in design or could use a much reduced horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient when designing walls. Please specify the horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient, ks, for this project. For reference: typically ks is assumed as 0.5xPGAM.

Seismic design is requirement for the bulkhead. Horizontal seismic acceleration coefficient, ks, shall be determined by the

DOR.

The RFP requires design IAW compliance with ASCE. The location of the project AUTOMATICALLY requires that necessitates seismic consideration design for the bulkhead. The RFP does not locality. It does not need to be called out separately.

310 2/4/22

1.8.2.2.3 and 1.8.3

The RFP does not specifically address the design of the bulkhead under seismic load conditions.

Confirm that seismic forces does not have to be addressed/considered in the bulkhead design.. If seismic forces has to be considered in the bulkhead design, the calculated seismic forces (ks assumed as 0.5xPGAM) from available methods (M-O or GLE methods), when using the geotechnical data in the RFP and the RFP specified design criteria, are very large (i.e., a large portion of the back-land area behind the bulkhead area are sliding under seismic loading) making the bulkhead extremely robust and likely an inefficient system after considering reasonable ground improvement. Please specify the extent of the seismic active zone or wedge to a specified distance behind the bulkhead (i.e.,

eg. say ~50 ft?). This will limit the seismic pressure on the wall to reasonable levels, and the assumption of the extent of any ground improvement for the competing teams.

Seismic design is requirement for the bulkhead and shall be determined by the

DOR.

311 2/4/22

Alternatively, if seismic forces have to be considered in the bulkhead design, to discourage the use of design assumptions or methods that may be approved during final design, specify the design seismic forces on the bulkhead wall.

Seismic design is requirement for the

312 2/4/22

Alternatively, if seismic forces have to be considered in the bulkhead design, provide a target factor of safety for the design of the bulkhead under static loading

Seismic design is requirement for the conditions that would satisfy the seismic loading forces at this site.

314 2/4/22

1.13.4.1 pg 120 of 209 and 1.8.4.6 pg

RFP states to use both "underdeck utility supports" (section 1.8.4.6) and "cabling encased within the decking" (section 1.13.4.1) . Please confirm which method, under deck, or encased, is to be used on the pier.

The RFP, where permitted, provided flexibility to the DOR.

Where incorporated in the design, RFP 01800-1.8.4.6 pertains to the material types allowed for underdeck utility supports.

RFP 01800-1.13.4.1 requires ‘cabling encased within the deck’.

Yes.

318 2/4/22 It is industry standard that

Contractors may not file for additional permits while a Resolution Agreement is in effect.

Please confirm the Contractor can apply for permits for the dredging and Pier November work with outstanding Resolution Agreements that have may or may not be resolved. If the Contractor has to wait for the Resolution Agreements to be fulfilled prior to applying for site specific permits, the current Contract duration of 1,125 days is not achievable.

See amendment 006. Additional documents in Attachment N include the Resolution Agreement with the USACE addressing removal of submerged equipment and bulkhead debris (MAW).

The USCG is not aware of any clause in this Resolution Agreement or other incorporated requirements that would preclude a Contractor from seeking the permits on the USCG's behalf. The permits in question are necessary to carry out the requirements in the Agreement.

Also, see Amendment 0010 Item #10.

326 2/8/22

RFP Specification Section 01800 Paragraph 1.1.1

Notes “bilge water” & “compressed air” for New Shore Tie service requirements. But both bilge water and the compressed air are not noted anywhere else in the RFP with any details on what the intended installation would be.

Please verify if the bilge water and compressed air are applicable for this project or if it was a typo.

CA as noted in another RFI.

See amendment. (MEB) See Item 1 in RFI 0006 wrt bilge water.

There is no requirement for bilge water.

Bilge water will be stored onboard and pump to a commercial vehicle as required.

Amendment 0006 item #1

For the compressed air requirements, see Amendment 0005

328 2/14/22 RFP Guide Specifications, Section 01800, 1.8.1.2 Second Bullet Point

Will the government allow the demolition of the existing bulkhead to be, as necessary to install the

Yes. Refer to Amendment 005, RFI Question 82.

new bulkhead? For example leaving in place the existing Deadman, Support Piles and Tiebacks.

330 2/18/22

Amendment 3

In Amendment 3 the response to RFI #5 indicated the base bids should be based on the ‘estimated quantify for bidding’ from the RFP specification 01800-1.19.7.2.

Amendment 5 response to RFI #187 indicates the bidding quantity under 1800 1.19.7.2 for dredge quantity is inclusive of the ‘overdepth and the bulkhead release area’. Please clarify if the bidding quantity for dredging which includes the overdepth dredging in the dredge prism and the bulkhead release area is inclusive of the material which is to be removed on the outboard side of the collapsed bulkhead to EL. -32 as mentioned in the response to RFI question #82 in Amendment 5 which indicates the dredge depth ‘of the original face of the bulkhead to a depth of -32

MLLW.’

See Amendment 0011.

331 2/18/22

Amendment 5

Amendment 5 response to RFI question #187 indicates the bidding quantity under 1800 1.19.7.2 for dredge quantity is inclusive of the ‘overdepth and the bulkhead release area’. Please separate the volume of the ‘bulkhead release area’ from the total volume of the dredging and overdepth under 1800

1.19.7.2 which is 385,449 cy.

See Amendment 0011.

332 2/18/22

H.3 Insurance requirements

Under section H.3 Insurance requirements, the language states ‘property damage liability insurance shall be required only in special circumstances as determined by the agency’. Advise if Property damage liability will be required for this task order

Not anticipated at this time.

338 2/22/22

Amendment 0005 RFI responses 71, 138, 286 adds section 1800, 1.11 Plumbing for Compressed Air. RFP section 01800_1.1.1 indicates new shore ties are to have potable water, fire protection, sewer, bilge water and compressed air services but nothing is provided in the 1800 specifications or RFP drawings for these services. Please provide shore tie details and location requirements such as bollards, encasement construction, anti-snag construction. Additionally, please provide utility connection types, utility sizes, connection heights, required access, required isolation.

The RFP does not indicate if utilities are to be grouped or separated, please provide desired location and orientation of each utility relative to

NSC.

The information we have available can be found in Attchment C of the RFP and the Pier Papa as-builts included in amendment 0010.

344 2/22/22

1.8.6.3 States both 36" width and

60" width, but additionally states that 60" wide gangways are to be provided. Is 60" the correct inside width for the gangways?

RFP 01800-1.8.6.3 is correct. The minimum width for two-way traffic is 60”.

If the gangway design incorporates a traffic divider, then each traffic lane shall have a minimum width of 36”.

345 2/22/22

1.8.6.6.1 If no permanent mods can

be made to the NSC Flight Decks, what does the quick release pin attach the gangway to?

Vertical railing stations. See Amendment 0011.

346 2/22/22

Please confirm if casters are required at both ends of the brow?

Can wheels be used in lieu of casters as they are more suitable when used at an angle. Casters will not function when the gangway is mounted at an angle.

Casters at the NSC flight deck have been deleted. Wheels can be substituted for casters. See Amendment 0011.

356 2/4/22 01800.

1.8

1.8.2.2.4

Specifications require Epoxy Coated Reinforcement. Would the owner/Government consider alternatives which provide equivalent corrosion resistance?

For bidding purposes, assume Epoxy Coated where specified. Post award, the Government will consider ‘equal’ corrosion resistance.

No.

357 2/4/22

II. ADDITIONAL CLAUSES

a) Please clarify if it's the Government's intent for the offerors to provide the representations and certifications within their price proposal response. b) If so, please advise on placement within the price proposal (i.e. before or after the Price Proposal Form).

Yes, it is part of the price proposal.

Placement of the Representations and Certifications is at the offeror’s discretion.

358 2/4/22 12 of

01110

1.10

Additional information regarding electrical service is required for estimating purposes. Local utility typically does not speak with contractor until a service agreement with the owner is established.

There is no additional information to provide.

See electrical utility connection allowance on Price Proposal Form.

359 2/4/22 101

RFP

1.8.5.3

RFP section 1.8.5.2 states the vessel layout shall consider both a port and starboard side mooring configuration. For shore tie power mound locations, our understanding is that the NSC ships only carry a power cable of 150' long for connection to each shore tie. (1) Will additional power mounds be required to accommodate both mooring configurations to limit the connection of 150' cable? (2) Or will longer cables be provided for each ship to reach a single power mound location per ship?

See amendment 0007 for power mound clarifications.

One power pound per vessel is going to be needed, and we could say that. Language in Amendment 007 specifies 4 mounds for base and one for optional bid, which, as of now, is what is being asked.

The quantity of power mounds had been corrected in Amend 0010.

Electrically, there will be no need for additional shore power connections based on ship configurations.

368 2/4/22

Part 1

Non-Price Proposal

(1) Will the Government please consider reducing the font size requirement from 12 to 10 or 11?

(2) Will the Government please consider allowing an alternate standard font styles in lieu of Garamond?

Font size on drawings, schedules, etc...Shall NOT be smaller than 10 font Garamond. Refer to the TOA for other font restrictions.

371 2/4/22 159

01800 1.19.4

Due to limited dredging operations, please provide an anticipated award date so that necessary

For bidding purposes ONLY assume award will be July 15, 2022.

accommodations can be accounted for in the proposal.

382 2/4/22 3 of 30

Task Order Announceme nt

Base Bid, Bid Option 1

Quantity of shore power mounds in the base bid (5), Bid Option 1 adds another. This is different from wording in the RFP, please confirm quantity of ships, power mounds, transformers, for base bid and bid option 1. The CSTO section 4.D.4.c states "Each home port cutter shore tie service shall be fed from a dedicated voltage delta-delta isolation transformer", which our interpretation as a dedicated isolation transformer for each ship.

See RFI 377 that corrected the number of power mounds (ESC).

Regarding CSTO, please see section

1.13.12 for compliance standards. See Amendment 10 There is no modification in amend 10. The CSTO requirement is located in 1.13.12 of the original RFP. Amendment 10 corrected the number of power mounds.

383 2/4/22 103 of

1.8.5.9

The RFP cites SFLC TS 611 fenders and separators. Can the Coast Guard provide this reference?

See Amendment 0010.

384 2/4/22 97 of

1.8.2.2

The RFP states a 75 year service life is required for concrete elements for precast and cast in place concrete, in accordance with ACI 318-14. Does the Coast Guard require Stadium testing of all concrete mixes?

No

385 2/4/22 97 of

1.8.2.2

Will the Coast Guard accept concrete mix designs that were previously designed and validated for a 75 year service life?

No, waterfront concrete listed within RFP 01800, 1.8.2.2 must meet ‘Durability Requirements of ACI 318-14 or the current UFC Marine Concrete mix design provisions’, where specified.

386 2/4/22 97 of

1.8.2.2.4

The RFP states that all reinforcing for CIP concrete shall use epoxy coated rebar. If a service life of 75 years can be verified; can other rebar types be considered for use?

For bidding purposes, assume Epoxy Coated where specified. Post award, the Government will consider ‘equal’ corrosion resistance alternatives.

No.

387 2/4/22 158 of

1.9

What is the acceptable depth of the mudline at the bulkhead?

Refer to RFP 01800-1.19.7.2.2. and Amendment 005, RFI Question 7. Amend 0006.

390 2/4/22 99 of

1.8.2.3,1.8.5.5

The second sentence in Par.

1.8.3.2.1 is unclear to our team.

See Amendment 009, RFI Question 111.

Please clarify the intent of this sentence.

391 2/4/22 100 of

1.8.4.4

Is the pier required to support crane operations at any point (length and width) along the pier?

Yes.

Refer to RFP 01800-1.8.2.3. The pier deck shall be capable of supporting 600 PSF uniform live load or 2,500 LBS point load placed at any location.

392 2/4/22 101 of

1.8.4.5

RFP states to provide emergency egress/safety ladders from the fixed pier to the floating docks. (1) Please provide which floating docks are in reference? (2) Please specify whether ladders are required along the length of the pier?

FloatingThere are no floating docks are not required.. See Amendment 005, RFI Question 47.

. Safety ladders are an OSHA requirement.

394 2/4/22 101,10 3 of

1.8.5.1 (i), 1.8.5.10

Is it the intent to alternate bollards and cleats at 60' o.c. maximum?

That would place bollards at 120' on centers.

Refer to Amendment 0010.

395 2/4/22 General

Pier Design

It is our intent to design the pier in accordance with UFC 4-152-01 and ASCE 61-14, Seismic Design of Piers and Wharves. Is it acceptable to use displacement-based design methods to determine seismic demands for the pier?

Yes.

396 2/4/22 General

Bulkhead Design

Geotechnical information provided in the RFP indicates the presence of a highly compressible silt/clay stratum approximately 40 feet thick at the upland portion of the project site (behind the new bulkhead).

Placement of fill behind the new bulkhead will result in significant settlement/consolidation of this stratum. (1) Is it acceptable to provide lightweight aggregate fill and surcharging to reduce the potential for long-term settlement/consolidation? (2) What are acceptable limits for long-term

Design of the backfill behind the bulkhead and backfill shall be determined by the DOR. The stated design approach is acceptable. The Government does not have amplifying limits for long-term settlement/consolidation behind the bulkhead.

settlement/consolidation behind the new bulkhead? Also, this settlement/consolidation will result in negative skin friction/downdrag on the sheet piles and anchorage system.

397 2/4/22 General

RFP

Forklift Load

Is the pier required to support forklift loads at any point (length and width) along the pier? If so, what capacity forklift will be used?

Yes. Forklift design loads are far below other specified loads.

Refer to RFP 01800-1.8.2.3 for pier design loads . Fork lift loads are not anticipated to exceed listed design criteria.

409 2/4/22 01110 1.8.3 Section 01110 1.8.3 states that the Contractor is to provide a temporary guard house at the Hobson Ave gate and provide for security and access at that gate. (1) Please clarify if the Contractor is required to provide the temporary guard house. (2) If so, please provide specifications required for this temporary guard house (dimensions, duration, etc.). (3) Is the Contractor required to provide a security guard? (4) If so, please provide duration and time(s) security guard is required.

See #203 above.

This is no longer a requirement.

For Amendment 11:

Section 01110:

1.8.3. …Delete “This gate currently is unmanned and lacks a guard house to support a security watch. Contractor is to provide a temporary guard house at the Hobson Ave gate and provide for security and access at that gate.”

416 2/28/22 Amendment 0006, RFI 325 allows the Contractor to locate the isolation transformers, switchboard and breakers on the pier. By doing this, the structures will need to be elevated to meet the Flood Class 4 (approximately 10 feet above the pier), and structure sizes will restrict the pier traffic flow of vehicles and cranes on the pier. RFI response 166 states section

CSTO is the governing document for shore power connection construction.

The Iso transformers shall not be located on the pier. (ESC)

This response amends the responses in RFI 325 and RFI 166. The CSTO for Electrical Shore Ties is the government document and isolation transformers are not authorized on the pier.

1.13.12.1 of the RFP is the governing documents for shore power install requiring us to follow the CSTO which does not allow for the iso transformers, switch board, breakers to be on the pier. Please confirm we are to follow the RFI response 166, and not the RFI response 325.

422 3/3/22

Addendum 8

USACE Resolution VT Bulkhead w/ Exhibits Final Signed 16 dec 2020

In Addendum 8 – document USACE Resolution VT Bulkhead w/ Exhibits Final Signed 16 dec 2020 – last page Exhibit 6 indicates a dredge depth to -32 feet with specific latitude and longitude coordinates between Piers Mike and November. Please confirm dredging to -32 within these coordinates is not applicable to this RFP whereby Exhibit 6 is representative of future dredge scope and that the dredge prism defined in the drawings C-111,112, 113, 114 Rev1’s drawings provided in addendum 7 is applicable for this

RFP.

Confirmed. Dredging shall be in accordance with RFP Drawings.

431 3/9/22

Amendment 0008 removed page limitations from Factors 1 and 3.

Given that Factor 2 contains 3 in-depth requirement sections, while Factors 1 and 3 only have 1, will the Government please consider removing or extending the page limitation of Factor 2 as well? In addition, the large typestyle/font requirements of the NonPrice proposal further limit Offerors from fully responding to each item within the current page limitation of Factor 2.

Page limitation is extended to 10 type written pages. If drawings are needed to describe previous projects, then drawings do not count towards page limitation. See Amendment 0011.

432 3/11/22

Amendment 009, RFI response 272 confirms no repairs to existing utilities are to be included, Confirmed. The map in Attachment H was added for clarification of locations as requested per RFI 389.

but RFI 389 response provides Attachment H map of existing utilities needing repairs. Please confirm we are not to include any repairs to existing utilities per RFI 272?

433 3/11/22

Amendment 0009, sheet C- 119REV2 New Work Note #1 states “Fill area of the bulkhead failure between the new bulkhead, South Hobson Avenue, the staging area at Pier Mike and the new pier access. Match Existing Grades at paved areas to remain”. Existing grades of the failed bulkhead area are not provided. Can existing grades be provided? If not, can a fill quantity be provided for bidding purposes?

Refer to Exhibit 4 in the document USACEResolution- VTBulkheadwExhibits_FINAL_signed_16DE C202.pdf provided with Attachment N in Amend 0008.

434 3/11/22

Amendment 009, RFI response states the contractor is encouraged to take into account the boring locations and proximity to the project site. We cannot extrapolate or make assumptions for the soil conditions, and can only use the soil boring data provided in the RFP nearest to the work. Please confirm our pricing shall be based on the RFP soil boring data nearest that specific scope of work?

Contractor shall make use of the Government provided soil borings for pricing.

435 3/11/22

Amendment 009, RFI response 222 states the Contractor is to coordinate disposal locations with the USACE during the permitting process, upland disposal at a local USACE-managed cell would be a common means of disposal but cannot be guaranteed by the USCG. We cannot price a disposal location that will be determined after award during the permit process. For

See Amendment 11. For bidding purposes, assume that all dredged material could be disposed of at the USACE’s Clouter Creek upland disposal facility. A variation in the actual approved disposal site would be managed as a changed site condition.

bidding purposes, the USCG needs to specify a specific disposal location and allow a price adjustment if the location differs once determined during permitting after award. Please provide disposal location for bidding.

436 3/11/22 Amendment 009, RFI response 236 states RFP 01800 1.8.2.2 is applicable to waterfront systems. Please confirm the concrete paving leading up to the pier is not considered a waterfront system?

Confirmed.

Concrete paving leading up to the pier is not a waterfront system.

437 3/11/22 Amendment 009, RFI response 236 states RFP 01800 1.8.2.2 is applicable to waterfront systems. Please confirm the electrical shelter concrete structure is not considered a waterfront system?

Confirmed.

The Electrical shelter concrete structure is not a waterfront system.

438 3/11/22 Amendment 009 made changes to the Price Proposal Form adding a line item for “Contaminated Soil and Materials for Disposal”. Amendment 009, item 1 under 1800

1.18.5.2.5 CONTAMINATED

UPLAND AND DREDGE SPOILS

DISPOSAL under Upland Disturbed/Excavated Areas states “The Contractor shall provide a cost per ton disposal rate for contaminated soils and materials as part of the bid schedule. For bidding purposes, assume that up to 1,500 tons of contaminated upland soils and material may be generated.”

What has been provided on the Price Proposal Form is just a price line item for Contaminated

See Amendment 11. Bidders shall provide both a per-ton disposal rate (valid for up to 1,500 tons) and a line item for bidding purposes that assumes the full 1,500 tons.

The Contractor will be reimbursed for the actual tons disposed of (up to 1,500 tons) at the proposed rate per ton. If actual disposal needs exceed 1,500 tons, then the unit cost for disposal of the additional waste will be managed as a changed site condition.

Soil and Materials for Disposal, not a unit price with quantity. What should this price be based upon – RFP says up to 1,500 tons. A price needs to be based on a quantity, not “up to”. Please clarify?

439 3/11/22 In Amendment 0009 Note 5 RFI response #214, there is some confusion on the demand load requirements. (1) Please confirm the 2,500kVA is the total demand of the site to be used when coordinating with Dominion Energy, but each ship shore power mound still requires the six (6) 500A receptacles and 2,000A of available output based on RFP section

1.13.12.4.3.1. (2) Please also confirm a dedicated isolation transformer is required for each ship, per CSTO section 4.D.4.c.”

Clarification of these two items will increase the accuracy of the competitors bids and will also help to provide a project that is in accordance with the end user needs.

Please disregard response to question

214. There was an error in the quantity of shore power connections required for each vessel. Each NSC requires four (4)- 400A, 480V, 3-phase connections. See amendment 0011 for corrected language.

Yes, an isolation transformer is required for each vessel per CSTO.