Formal Question and Answers Technical Cleaned.pdf
PDF 99 KB Posted
- Attached to
- 80GRC023CA001 Construction Management, Inspection, Surveying, and Testing Final Request For Proposal
- Solicitation number
- 80GRC023CA001
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to solicitation number 80GRC023CA001 for construction management, inspection, surveying, and testing services. The solicitation is from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Glenn Research Center. Questions addressed include defining overtime requirements, qualifications for fire protection support positions, addressing subcontracted services, preventative maintenance responsibilities, and the scope of a sample retro-commissioning task. Clarification is provided that the contractor will not be responsible for preventative maintenance of substations or approving equipment repairs and improvements identified during testing.
View the file
Other files
Show all 26
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
1. Question: Will NASA define the level of overtime (OT) required under the contract? To what extent is overtime labor to be included in the cost estimate for CLIN 3, 7, 9, & 11- Facilities and Construction Management?
Answer: NASA will not provide a level of overtime as there is not an accurate method to predict the amount of overtime that may be required. If the offeror proposes overtime, overtime rates should be included in the proposal and the offeror should document the estimating methodology for overtime within the basis of estimate.
2. Question: Please confirm the HV Safety Person is one (1) WYE, or can this individual also serve as a Construction Manager?
Answer: We cannot advise Offerors how many WYEs to propose. The primary duty required should be HV Safety. The function shall be fulfilled as part of the base contract. Execution of the function can be fulfilled by any qualified individual as part of their list of duties.
3. Question: In the Statement of Work for Fire Protection Support (Section 2.7), are there alternative qualifications, certifications, and/or years of experience that can substitute for the registered PE requirement for this position (for example, Certified Fire Protection Specialist)?
Answer: The offeror is free to propose alternatives and provide justification based on equivalency to the given qualifications and how this meets the requirements.
4. Question: Under the Sample Task, how would NASA like offerors to address subcontracted services, are complete proposals desired from subcontractors?
Answer: No. NASA is only concerned with process of acquisition of services from qualified firms.
5. Ques�on: Who is responsible for the preven�ve maintenance to the substa�on/s and associated equipment including circuit breakers, voltage regulators, transformers, UG switches and pad mounted transformers, etc?
Answer: The CMIST-II Contractor will not be responsible for preventive maintenance to substation/s and associated equipment including circuit breakers, voltage regulators, transformers, UG switches and pad mounted transformers, etc
6. Ques�on: Is the contractor responsible or is there a vendor pool of approved site subcontractor for preven�ve and predic�ve maintenance. If there is an approved site contractor pool of service providers, please provide the list of approved service subcontractors.
Answer: The CMIST-II Contractor will not be responsible for preventive maintenance.
7. Ques�on: Atachment Q (Building 3 Sample Retro-commissioning Task), paragraph 5.1.2.5 requires the commissioning form to “Subcontract with Siemens as necessary for performing func�onal tes�ng”. It is common, during func�onal tes�ng, to iden�fy minor changes that are needed to the user graphics or changes to system programming, loop tuning, etc… Is implemen�ng these minor modifica�ons within the scope of Siemens support (in addi�on to performing func�onal tes�ng) or would these be considered ‘improvements’ as referred to earlier in the paragraph, and in 5.1.2.6?
Answer: Yes, for the purposes of the sample task, these would be considered as improvements.
8. Ques�on: Atachment Q (Building 3 Sample Retro-commissioning Task), paragraph 5.1.2.6 states “Repairs or improvements iden�fied during the Inves�ga�ve Phase and during monitoring and tes�ng will be reported to GRC ..” If the necessary repairs or improvements prevent comple�on of func�onal tes�ng or cause a piece of equipment to fail func�onal tes�ng, is re-test of the equipment
- once repairs are made – within the sample task scope, or will a separate task order be issued for re-test following comple�on of repairs?
Answer: Success on this sample task can be assumed for the purposes of this proposal. THE
OFFEROR IS NOT TO PERFORM ANY OF THE WORK OR PRODUCE ANY DELIVERABLES FOR THE
SAMPLE TASK AS DESCRIBED IN THE RETRO-COMMISSIONING SCOPE OF WORK.
9. Question: The current version of the GRC Safety Manual requires that the High Voltage Specialist be employed by Wolf Creek. Has the GRC Safety Manual been changed to allow organizations other than Wolf Creek to provide this service?
Answer: No
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .