DMB406 PreProposal Addendum 2 - LG

DMB-406 (R 0/17)

STATE OF MICHIGAN Date Issued: February 13, 2023 Department of Technology, Management and Budget Index No(s): n/a State Facilities Administration File No: 751/22313.TAP 3111 W. St Joseph St. Lansing, MI 48917 Department: Natural Resources P.O. Box 30026 Project Name: Lake Gogebic SP & Lansing, Michigan 48909 Porcupine Mountains Wilderness SP - Subject: PSC Proposal Utility Improvements Proposal Due Date: Feb 16, 2023 per Addendum 1

PSC PRE-PROPOSAL ADDENDUM NO. 2

TO: All Interested Parties

SUBJECT: Revision to RFP Soliciation Notice and Project Statement

INTENT: This Addendum is issued to provide additional and corrected information to proposers as requested, distributed or identified at the mandatory pre-proposal meeting and walk-through-inspection conducted on January 19, 2023.

Item 1 – Question: We wouldn’t recommend pressure testing the existing forcemain since it could damage it. Any damage would be hard to locate since the system is buried. Rather, we would recommend doing some visual physical condition assessments of the line at various locations. This might include excavating and exposing the line in a few spots to review the condition of it. Please confirm if this is an acceptable alternative to the pressure testing.

Reponse: Assume the forcemain will need replacement. Pressure testing should not be performed. Visual assessment is approprriate, acceptable and desired.

Item 2 – Question: Please confirm this proposal is not to include costs for installing the ground water monitoring wells, but should include costs for monitoring them, sampling them, and reporting on the results once the monitoring plan is developed and wells are installed.

Reponse: Proposals should include costs to develop a groundwater monitoring plan, and implementation of that plan to include installation of not less than 4 monitoring wells, plus sampling sets of appropriate test parameters over 6 sampling events (initial sampling plus monthly sampling for 5 months), and reporting.

Item 3 – Question: Are there existing hydraulic infiltration issues with the soils for in the spray irrigation area? (ie. issues with water ponding?)

Reponse: Lagoon effluent is discharged daily into the infiltration area for approximately 2-3 weeks every Fall. There is a low area in a portion of the infiltration area where ponding has been observed until the effluent dissipates. When precipiation of sufficinent quantity occurs concurrent with discharge to the infiltration area, the infiltration area overflows, as a function of site grading, back to the source lagoon.

Item 4 – Question: Lake Gogebic Headquarters Onsite Treatment Analysis: the scope requires test holes to be dug for soils analysis – is the DNR’s expecting the AE firm to hire a contractor for the test holes or are there equipment and resources at the park that can perform this work? Are we supposed to assume that the cost of soils analysis be covered within the soils boring and soil sampling allowance? Are we to assume that a standard perk test will be performed by Local Health Department as part of permit fee?

Reponse: Yes, the PSC is responsible for test excavtion performance without counting on the presence or availabiltiy of park resources. Include a $3,000.00 allowance in the proposal to perform that task, including soil analysis, noting in the proposal as usual if the PSC believes that amount is insufficient and what amount should be, and is included, in the PSC’s proposal. The Local Health Department (LHD) testing included in the permit fee should be clarified with the LHD so that assumptions can be mitigated by ensuring that any necessary testing is included in the LHD fee or in the PSC services.

Item 5 – Question: There is not an allowance for Archeological survey, should we include a cost?

Reponse: Yes, include a $25,000 allowance.

Item 6 – Question: Will the Soil Borings shown on sanitary plans be available to the selected firm?

Reponse: No. Assume that information is not available.

Item 7 – Question: Only electrical as-builts are requested to be prepared - are all utilities to have as-builts created?

Response: Yes, creating as-builts for all utilities is desired.

Item 8 – Question: CCTV for the sewer section to the day use area and the Head Quarters sanitary force main pressure testing are stated to be required, but no allowance given. Should we include an allowance for these or do you want an actual quote included in our submittal? We also want to confirm that no other sections require CCTV.

Reponse: The task is to be included in the proposal, and no allowance has been established, so a quote or estimate by the PSC should be identified. No other sections require CCTV.

Item 9 – Question: Has the DNR located any existing underground utilities in the park where the improvements are scheduled, or is it the responsibility of the AE firm to complete this work (directly or subcontracted)?

Reponse: The DNR has not located existing utilities, and the A/E firm is tasked to complete utility locating.

Here ends PSC Pre-Proposal Addendum No. 2.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Two copies of this Addendum, properly signed in the space provided below, must be acknowledged and returned with the bidder's proposal for submission of a valid proposal. The changes and information shall become part of the contract documents. (Authority: 1984 PA 431)

Firm Name

Bidder's Signature Date

Sincerely, Tom Pawlowski, Project Director DTMB - State Facilities Administration Design and Construction Division