Addendum 1 - RFP 00254 Grizz Dome Turf Replacement.pdf

ADDENDUM #1

RFP 00254

Oakland University Grizz Dome Turf Replacement Date: October 6, 2025

This Addendum is to address questions received as part of the RFP process.

Q&A

1. Question: There seems to be a lot of specifications that are not related to the removal and installation of the turf. Is there another vid category that is out that they would be applicable for?

Answer: The division 2 and 32 sections cover the products and the work scope. The division 1 sections are the general requirements for any project, telling the bidders how it will be handled administratively, e.g. how to submit shop drawings or substitution requests. There are no other bid categories.

2. Question: The drawings state on the demolition to remove the infill from the turf, are we to reuse the infill on the field? I do not see that in the specifications. If not, is there a reason to remove the infill before removing the turf?

Answer: No, the University does not want to reuse the infill.

3. Question: Is there any maintenance equipment required?

Answer: No grooming equipment is required, however if your product requires specific maintenance equipment to be used that must be clearly in the submitted proposal.

4. Question: Can you confirm how many tests are required and which ones are for the warranty period? It seems excessive and I just want to make sure I am understanding it correctly. Also, can you confirm if it needs to be a 3rd party?

Answer: In response to Item #4, the testing requirements noted in the specifications are identified as follows:

1. Pre-manufacturing Testing:

a. This test is typically in-house testing that the manufacturer has performed on their product(s) and not a specific test required for the project. As part of the submittal package by the awarded vendor, they would provide a product data sheet that would list the performance criteria of their product, which should align to the performance cirti

b. This would not be an added expense applied to the project.

c. This would be a one-time test typically performed by the vendor 1-4 times per year as they continually produce their products.

2. Pre-Shipment Testing:

a. This test is fairly standard with our specifications as a quality assurance item.

After the product has been manufactured and before it’s shipped to jobsite, we request that (5) random rolls are pulled and sampled by an independent testing firm to ensure the product produced for OU meets the specifications and the manufacturers Pre-Manufacturing Testing. It is a simple way to ensure that corners are not cut during production, and the product intended is actually produced.

b. This test is typically a small added cost to the vendors overall bid, but should be included with their lump sum bid price.

c. This would be a one-time test performed only during manufacturing.

3. Post-Installation Testing

a. This testing requirement is common within the industry and requires a Gmax, HIC, and infill depth measurements to be performed by an independent testing firm. The results of this test would be used for warranty purposes, but it also ensures that the field has the correct amount of infill at the time of completed installation.

b. This test is also a small added cost to the vendors overall bid but should be included with their lump sum bid price.

c. Per the spec, this would be a one-time test performed by the vendor upon completion

i. It is recommended that this testing is performed on an annual basis, either by the University or by the successful vendor. Performing this test annually allows you to track the hardness of the field and ensure the correct infill depths are maintained.

ii. **Note: if the Alternate is accepted to perform the Annual Maintenance, the vendor would perform this test on an annual basis through the warranty period and the costs for this service would be expected to be included in their lump sum Alternate price. Testing beyond the 8-year warranty period is normally an added cost and ranges in cost depending on how the field ages.

For warranty coverage, all the turf companies provide a warranty for their products, and the industry norm is an 8-year warranty period. We have seen some manufacturers offer 10 and 12 year warranties, but this is not common practice and not something included with the current specifications. The requirement we note in the specifications for a 3rd Party is also fairly common in the industry, but I would say that OU would have the ability to not require a third-party insurer.

Third-party insurance coverage covers the field during the warranty period should the awarded vendor go through bankruptcy, dissolves, or becomes non-responsive to warranty claims.

Most vendors are financially stable whereas this requirement could be waived, however unforeseen situations may occur where a vendor may “close their doors”, and if that occurs during the warranty period without 3rd party coverage, the field would not be covered. Again, this is an extreme circumstance and not something we commonly see.

The 3rd Party Warranty coverage is typically an added expense and should be included with the vendors lump sum Bid.