Amendment_0006_70Z08718RPJT90000.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

87 1 8

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

00006 02/02/2018 211878PJT00

6. ISSUED BY 7. ADMINISTRATED BY (If other than Item 6)

USCG CEU JUNEAU DET

SEATTLE 915 SECOND AVE, RM

2664 SEATTLE, WA 98174-1011

SAME AS BLOCK 6

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

70Z08718RPJT90000

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

*TO BE COMPLETED BY VENDOR IF NOT COMPLETE 10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

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 Offer is extended is not extended.

NOTE: 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 Item 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR 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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hours and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

N/A

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS, IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. 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, 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.)

USCG Air Station Kodiak Construction Services For Design/Build Repairs to the Hangar I Fire Protection Systems.

AMEND SOLICITATION 70Z08718RPJT90000 AS FOLLOWS:

See Continuation Pages

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

BY

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

A. CHANGES/CLARIFICATIONS TO THE SOLICITATION

1. The following is for clarification purposes concerning Section L8/TECHNICAL FACTORS/Factor 1:

Contractor and Sub-Contractor Experience in the solicitation “Describing a fire protection construction project (Representative Construction Project) in a remote austere environment that has been completed or substantially completed by the contractor or subcontractor within the past 10 years.”

• For the project submitted performance must have been completed or substantially completed within 10 years from the issuance of this solicitation on December 14, 2017. Any projects submitted from prior to December 14, 2007 will be considered technically unacceptable.

2. Are we supposed to include final pricing on the CD/DVD? In many cases we receive final pricing in the moments leading up to the bid due date/time.

• Electronic copy on CD/DVD shall be the exact same information as the hard copy.

B. CHANGES TO SPECIFICATIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS:

1. Refer to Appendix AB: For your information: as part of a future project; braces at grid line 4 between gridlines E&F and at grid line F between gridlines 4&5 will be replaced. And, a new door will be provided near the column at 4/F.

Add this note to Drawing F1.12:

“All new HEF equipment shall be designed and installed to provide a 6’-3” minimum clearance east of the center line of the column at grid line F, and the new HEF supply line shall be installed to provide a minimum of 11’-0” clearance east of the center line of the column at grid line F.”

A marked up PDF drawing is enclosed for information purposes.

2. Delete note on drawing F1.13, southwest riser” “Provide design alternative for alternate sources to high bay sprinkler.” The Southwest riser shall be removed, capped, and only the 4 inch test header retained at this location. A future project will remove this lead-in and relocate the test header.

C. ANSWERS TO PROPOSER QUESTIONS:

Q13. Fire Protection section 1.10-S.5 states that rate of discharge is to be in accordance with NFPA 409 and NFPA 11 other than the submergence depth is to be 3.2 feet and the submergence time shall be 4 minutes.

NFPA 409 states to design high expansion foam systems as local application systems per NFPA 11 which would not require a leakage factor. Current military requirements (UFC 4-211-01) include a leakage factor of 3.0 for a hangar bay of this size. Is a leakage factor to be applied for the foam rate of discharge or is NFPA 409 to be followed?

A13. A leakage factor (CL) is required for this project for compensation for loss of foam due to leakage around doors and windows and through un-closable openings shall be determined by the design engineer after evaluation of the structure in accordance with NFPA 11. A CL factor of 2.70 was used in concept design.

Q14. Fire Protection section 1.10-S.3 states that the performance requirements shall be demonstrated during final acceptance testing. Are there specific performance requirements to be met or is it just the performance requirements of NFPA 409?

A14. Inspection and testing requirements are specified beginning in the Fire Protection Section 1.10 – AA. This includes compliance with the requirements of NFPA 409 and as specified in the Preliminary Acceptance Test (Section 1.10 – CC) and the Final Acceptance Test (Section 1.10 – GG).

Q15. SECTION 010100 B/1.1/Scope of Work/1.1.A.F mentions an engineer’s stamp SECTION 001401 CR/1.1.A.C Fire Protection Engineer is named in this section.

SECTION 001800 D/1.10.P.3 states system designer/commissioner to be NICET certified The above sections leave ambiguity on whether a Fire Protection Engineer will be required for stamping of the fire alarm system, foam detection and control system, and clean agent system design. Please clarify whether an FPE stamp will be required for these systems.

A15.The above sections leave ambiguity on whether a Fire Protection Engineer will be required for stamping of the fire alarm system, foam detection and control system, and clean agent system design. Please clarify whether an FPE stamp will be required for these systems.

Q16. Appendix AA/2.3.3.6 HEF Pre-discharge Alarm and Time Delay: Emergency procedures should be developed to respond to pre-discharge and discharge conditions. Occupied modular buildings on the hangar floor will have to develop emergency evacuation procedures to ensure safe egress prior to discharge.

Is the Contractor responsible for the creation of the Emergency Evacuation Procedures? If so please define the requirements?

A16.The contractor shall develop the procedures, including the modular buildings. Coordinate with O&M Manual requirements; Section 017810 B.

Q17. Drawings and Specification/Page A2.22 and Specification 07 30 00/A2.22 direct the contractor to install tapered roof insulation, roof membrane, fascia, flashing, gutter and downspouts. Whereas the roofing specification 07 30 00 relates to a steep slope roof with CertainTeed Landmark TL shingles Please advise if a Flat roof as shown in the drawings was the depiction submitted to SHPO for historical review. If a flat roof is so desired please provide direction on approved materials for this installation.

A17.Specification Section 073000 (Base Kodiak Standard Specifications) relates to a steep slope roof with CertainTeed Landmark TL shingles, which is not applicable to this project. A flat roof is the expected outcome to be consistent with historic appearance.

Specification Section 001800 D 1.7. B. 5. C.; specifies roofing. Delete the below requirement:

“Includes high-albedo Energy Star compliant surface finish or material.” And, “The roofing is to include an energy star compliant coating or membrane.

Modify the roofing specifications to include the following:

"The cap sheet shall have a gray appearance similar to adjacent Hangars."

See Amendment 4: Q/A 11. Also, it confirmed wall and, therefore foundation insulation are NOT required.

Specification Section 001800 D 1.7.5 calls for 6” minimum roof insulation. Upon further review, specifying a minimum thickness and a minimum R value, creates a conflict.

Roof requirements are specified in Appendix AA, Paragraph 3.4. Summarizing/ clarifying the requirements: The new roof shall consist of SBS Modified Bitumen roof membrane over protection board and insulation.

The contractor shall design and construct a roofing system that allows the specified warranty to be obtained.

The contractor’s design shall conform to the following:

• Minimum roof slope of ½ inch per foot, per specs. Greater slope is preferred.

• Minimum insulation thickness is 1-1/2 inch.

• No internal drains allowed.

• Conform to (ASHRAE 90.1), 2010.

• Design wind speed should be 165 MPH per ASCE 7-10

Additional design considerations;

• Fire Resistance - Class A - ASTM E 108 or UL 790

• Accelerated Weathering - Roofing system shall withstand 2000 hours of exposure when tested according to ASTM G 152, ASTM G 154, or ASTM G 155

• Impact Resistance - Roofing system shall resist impact damage when tested according to ASTM D 3746 or

ASTM D 4272

• Hail-Resistance Rating: SH

• FM Global Listing: Roofing, base flashings, and component materials shall comply with requirements in FM

Global 4450 or FM Global 4470 as part of a roofing system, and shall be listed in FM Global's "RoofNav" for Class 1 or noncombustible construction, as applicable.

• Fire/Windstorm Classification: Class 1A-120 minimum and as required to resist Field, Corner, and Perimeter Wind Uplift forces identified via FM Global's "RoofNav"

The contractor shall coordinate the building’s heating system with the above modified insulation requirements.

Q18. Appendix C/Brand Name or Equal Requirements/Section 26 00 00 Electrical - Emergency Generators and Switchgear: ONAN w/ CUMMINGS engines. Does the requirement for Cummins power plants apply to the fire pumps as well?

A18. Yes.

Q19. REF 001800D, SECTION 1.8 (D.2.b)/Tie forces between the existing roof slab and the existing concrete walls are to be upgraded as part of this remodel. The force level is immediate occupancy per ASCE 7-10. The amount of upgrade is dependent upon the existing connection capacity, but no existing original drawings have been provided to determine the existing connection capacity. If original drawings are available, please provide. If a calculation has been done that assumes an existing connection capacity, please provide.

If we are to assume the existing connection has zero capacity, please specify.

A19.Drawings for the connection in question are not available. Assume the existing connection is inadequate and has zero capacity.

Q20. REF 001800D, SECTION 1.8 (D.2.a)-New tanks, riser manifold, backflow and controls will only weight about 4400 lbs – can an at-slab-level platform be framed between the bases of the columns to support the new equipment? This would not bear on the existing slab. This would result in no more than 2500 lbs to each existing column. As stated in the same section, the existing trusses (and the rest of the supporting structure) can support 350 lbs at multiple nodes. The equipment in the roof will likely weight significantly more than the tanks, therefore the existing foundations can support additional weight. Installing a separate foundation system for a small 10’x20’ area could create more problems than it solves, since the remainder of the system is connected to the hangar structure and the differential settlement between the separate foundation systems could induce irregularities and stresses into the fire suppression system.

A20.Install the new tanks on independent foundations to avoid loads on the existing building structure and foundation as stipulated in the Overall Approach and Objectives in the Structural Basis of Design provided in Appendix AA. Design shall incorporate appropriate settling/movement/seismic/etc isolation and restraint requirements.

Q21. Regarding the HEF control panel and Linear Heat detection requirements; Specification Section 1.10.U.1 Foam System Detection and Control (FSCP); Specification Section 1.10.V.1 Linear Heat Detection for Foam System; Specification Section 1.10.V.10 Linear Heat Detection for Foam System Specification Section 1.10.V.11 Linear Heat Detection for Foam System There is some conflict between these three sections, regarding intelligent control panels and the same manufacturer for both FSCP and Linear Detection. The ProtectoWire CTI system seems to be the only Linear Heat detector with the stated capability of displaying the linear distance to a Short Circuit or Alarm location.

However, the ProtectoWire control panels are not intelligent (which typically means addressable devices and an SLC circuit) as stated in the specification. The compatible (same manufacturer) ProtectoWire control panels are hardwire zoned panels (not intelligent) which can work in this application, but not what the specification demands in its current form. One alternative is a Kidde brand product called Alarm Line, which has an intelligent addressable interface for their linear heat detection cable, for use with a Kidde intelligent addressable releasing control (FSCP) panel for the HEF system. However, the Kidde product does not offer the distance indication feature to measure the short circuit or heat activation distance point of the AlarmLine detection wire.

Please clarify which product(s) or capabilities are desired and/or acceptable.

A21.This question incorporates questions 39, 41 and 42. Please reference those responses. The above description of the Kidde’s AlarmLine does not appear to meet the project requirements.

Q22. Spec Section 1.10.Y.14.h. Confirmation or verification of smoke detectors. The King Fisher IRACS does not have this capability of alarm verification for smoke detection. That is a feature most commonly available on intelligent addressable control panels. Is the King-Fisher IRACS acceptable for the Building Fire Alarm Control Panel (FACP)?

A22.The confirmation or verification of all smoke detectors in section 1.10.Y.14.h is waived.

Q23. Spec section 1.10.W.6 Addressable Clean Agent Control Panel; The Clean Agent Control Panel refers to the new FM-200 Clean Agent system for the North Lean-To, Second Deck, Emergency Generator Rm currently protected by a CO2 system. Is a hardwired control panel which is listed for releasing, and listed for use with the FM-200 agent and ancillary devices, acceptable for this Spec Section?

A23.The clean agent control panel shall be an addressable fire alarm control panel (FACP). A non-addressable FACP is unacceptable for the clean agent system. It shall be supervised by the new non-addressable King Fisher FACP.

Q24. 001800 D 1.15.I Haz Mat Survey Guidance states: The construction contractor is given “basis of proposal” instructions so there is fair competition… The AE Firm is responsible for all HAZMAT and remediation design… Lead Containing Dust: it is likely that HVAC duct work will contain low levels of contaminants, and all horizontal surfaces (overhead steel, piping, tops of ceiling tiles, etc).

Samples taken at the site visit identify existing dust as lead contaminated, warranting that all contractors working in the hangar receive lead awareness training, complete a blood level baseline test, and contractor’s insurance coverage should waive any lead exclusions and include a pollution liability policy. Please confirm such efforts and the associated costs should be included in the “basis of proposal”.

A24. Amendment 4 clarified procedures for lead/dust. All costs to perform the work shall be included in the initial proposal.

Q25. The entire parking lot between Cape Spencer and Hangar I is to be repaved. What shall we assume is the thickness of the existing ACP?

A25. Existing thickness not confirmed. New paving is required to be three inches minimum.

Q26. Based on previous project experience, members of our design-build team are aware of two large pile supported concrete equipment foundations (appox. 12 ft deep x 16 ft long x 4 ft wide) beneath the interior slab in Building 24, which are not addressed in the RFP (see attached). Our team is concerned the presence of the existing foundations may have great implications for the design and construction of the fire pump foundations, trench drain, and deluge pipe risers in Building 24. Please advise if the pile caps are to be demolished as part of this project, and to what extent.

A26. We have provided all available information. This is a design build acquisition. Assume that the extent of equipment foundation pile cap demolition would only be as necessary to install the new work. The contractor shall determine the impact any demolition would have on the superstructure and pile supported foundation-to-remain, and provide retrofit as necessary to prevent settlement of the new foundation or damage to the existing building.

Q27. Which existing buried deluge line elbows are to be excavated and inspected at Hangar I – the two interior or the two exterior, or both sets?

A27. This appears to refer to Appendix AA, paragraph 2.3. The intent of the requirement was to inspect and determine the condition of existing lead –ins to be reused in the design solution. Excavation for inspection inside the building envelope is not practical or required. Inspection of the north lead in pipes is practical when the exterior connection to the main is renewed. Inspect/scope the lead in to determine condition. The south lead in will have no opportunity for inspection, as no excavation or service lead-ins are being changed.

Contractor to evaluate the re-used of existing manifold and underground lead-ins , and notify the contracting officer of significant concerns.

See also Specification Section 001800 D 1.10 E.

Portions of the existing building’s fire suppression system will be retained/reused. The intent is to ensure, to the maximum extent practical, that the reused portions are in good condition before burying or placing into long term service.

Q28. 001800 Section 1.4.F – Is the intent of the modifying/replacing the storm-water catch basins and manholes to only replace the inlet frame and grate or is it to modify/replace the entire structure to meet City of Kodiak Standard details?

A28.If surface features (grates, inlets, etc.) are disturbed, then they shall be replaced with new compliant components. It is not the intent to replace the entire structure/catch basin, if not necessary.

Q29. Please verify the sizes of the existing steam and condensate pipes serving Building 24.

A29.To be field verified by contractor as part of their design build process. However; existing steam piping as shown on M1.21 in Appendix AB of the RFP documents is as follows:

Medium Pressure Steam (MPS) pipe: 1 ½-inches.

Pumped Condensate Return (PCR) pipe: 1 ¼-inches.

Additional information: The maximum operating pressure of the steam distribution system is 50 psig. The current operating pressure is 40 psig, with no expectation that the operating pressure will be reduced to some lower value.

Q30. Please verify when the last NFPA 25 5-Year inspection was performed at Hangar I and provide a copy of the report to proposal teams, if possible.

A30. Additional information is not available at this time.

Q31. The wet system control valve on the northwest lead-in is shutoff and water gauge reds 0 psi. Is this system out of service and drained for a particular reason? Will it need repairs and testing prior to it be being placed back in service?

A31. Maintenance of existing systems is the responsibility of the Base.

Q32. Will all existing risers and controls providing protection to the North and South Lean-to areas be retained and allowed to remain as is?

A32. Work is specified in the RFP.

Q33. Will the 2 lead ins on the south side of hanger bay, be able to left in service and provide water supply for the systems protecting the south lean-to areas?

A33. Sequencing of construction and continuity of services is the contractor’s responsibility. The SW underground lead-in currently serves the high-bay deluge systems and a hose test header. The southwest riser currently services the high-bay deluge systems and associated equipment which shall be demo’d. The SE lead-in serves high-bay deluge systems in addition to sprinkler systems for the south lean-to. Upon completion of the project, the SE lead-in shall only serve the South lean too system.

Q34. Please confirm all existing wet and dry sprinkler protection in North & South Lean-to areas will remain as is, except as noted on F Drawings?

A34. Not confirmed. See specification 001800 1.10.A. and bid schedule. Clarifying; the contractor shall perform a survey and provide a list of deficiencies. Identify deficiencies of the fire alarm/detection/suppression systems discovered and submit a report with a schedule indicating noted deficiencies with a recommend repair.

Q35. Will one hanger bay at a time be allowed to not have water based fire protection, while the new wet pipe sprinkler system is being installed?

A35. Refer to specifications for sequencing and outage requirements.

Q36. Is it the intent to install new wet pipe sprinkler protection and HEF systems, while the existing deluge systems are left in service. With removal of the existing deluge piping performed after new wet pipe systems are in service?

A36. See Amendment 4; Q/A 12.

Q37. F1.13 represents and existing dry valve at the southeast lead-in. One did not appear to be present at this location during the site visit. Please clarify?

A37. Contractor to verify existing equipment during design process.

Q38. Will it be required to provide 2” annual spaces around the entrance of the existing 10” lead-ins?

A38. The existing lead-in’s are not expected to be modified to this extent.

Q39. Section 1.10 D-72 U.1 states the FSCP shall control the hanger suppression and “monitor” the LHD. Is the LHD going to be from a standalone panel that the FSCP monitors for alarm or is the FSCP going to be required to “control” LHD as well?

A39. Use of a standalone LDH panel or a foam system FSCP panel is acceptable as long as the specification requirements including reporting, zoning, sizing, temperature, etc are complied with.

Q40. Section 1.10 D-72/74 U.6/11 These sections refer to the blue discharge foam discharge strobes for the protected area but not there rating. Are these devices and backboxes required to be weatherproof (minimum NEMA 4 rating) like the release and aborts stations for the FSCP? Will the conduit connections need to be watertight and enter the devices from the bottom?

A40. Any system/device that is installed in a potential wet/moist (foam) environment shall be properly protected. This is a design decision

Q41. Section 1.10 D-74 V.1/10/11. The section appears to be calling for an intelligent control panel for the LHD system only. Is “intelligent” to mean the same as “addressable” fire alarm panel? Is this a separate panel for LHD control only and will report alarms to the King Fisher and the FSCP panel or is it going to control foam release too?

A41. The LDH system can be connected to a conventional or intelligent control panel. There are several ways this can be accomplished. This DB specification does not limit the acceptable options. A single control panel, multiple control panels, separate LHD panel(s), etc. may be utilized. The LHD shall report alarms to the non-addressable King Fisher building fire alarm control panel as required by Section 1.10.J. The Foam System Detection and Control panel requirements are outlined in Section U. All designs must meet the applicable specification sections.

Q42. Please specify whether the LHD panel is standalone.

A42. See response to Q39 and Q41 above.

Q43. It appears only one manufacture offers a LHD product that complies with this sub-section (ProtectoWire). Will alternates be accepted if they’re not able to comply with this sub-section for distance and short detection but are still UL/FM approved for the application of LHD?

A43. Multiple manufacturers’ LHD systems with distance locating ability are available.

END OF AMENDMENT 0006