Pre Bid SIte Visit Questions-Answers edited by SrA Trevino.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

502D AIR BASE WING

JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO

27 February 2020

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL INTERESTED PARTIES

FROM: 502 CONS/JBKAD

1655 Selfridge Ave Lackland AFB, TX 78236-5253

SUBJECT: Government Response to Submitted Questions; FA301620B0005 Repair Nursery Road.

1. Question: Attachment 6 requires a proposed golf course route during construction. Please confirm whether this route can be base material. If not, please give specific requirements for this temporary route.

Answer: The Golf Carts can drive directly on the grass. However, you’ve made a good point, so plan for rolled base on the golf course route if it gets too worn during construction.

2. Question: The Statement of Work documents do not provide information pertaining to the thickness of the existing pavement section. Section 1.2.1.g requires demolition of existing 40 foot wide base course down to the top of the proposed stabilized subgrade. SOW documents are requiring the new pavement section to consist of 6’ of flex base and 5” of asphalt. Can the government confirm that the existing pavement section is 11” or less?

Answer: Yes, the existing section is 11” or less.

3. Question: The Statement of Work is requiring a new pavement section that is 40’ wide.

The existing pavement on either end of the project that the new pavement will tie-into is approximately 26-28’ wide as is the existing section we will demo. Please confirm that the government intent is to widen this section of the road to 40’.

Answer: Contractor will need to provide a 100 foot tapers on each side of the road to narrow it back down.

4. Question: During the site visit it was indicated that after award and submission of Traffic Control period there could be up to a 90 day approval process. Please confirm this is correct.

Answer: This is correct. We are planning for Contractor to have 30 days to prepare the plan, 30 days for the Base to review/approve the plan, 30 days for the Public Affairs Office to inform the Base public about the plan, a total of 90 days.

5. Question: Section 32 17 23 Paragraph 2.2.1 indicated Solventborne Paint. Please confirm whether Type I Thermoplastic Striping or Type II Waterborne striping can also be utilized for this project?

Answer: We want to try Solvent borne paint because COSA has spoken highly of its longevity and ability to cleaner looking longer.

6. Question: With this being a Design Build project would the government permit the use of concrete instead of asphalt pavement?

Answer: No.

7. Question: Section 01 11 00 Paragraph 1.2.1.e.2 requires removal of existing 12” RCP stormwater pipes and replacing with 18” HDPE stormwater pipe at the Old Vehicle Inspection area. Since the vehicle inspection area is being demolished and not replaced it does not appear that the 18” HDPE is needed for drainage purposes. Currently, the placement of the 18” RCP will cause grading concerns for a 40’ pavement section in that area. Please confirm whether it is acceptable if deemed feasible by the Designer of Record to eliminate the 18” RCP and grade the area to drain to the existing culvert drain to the south.

Answer: This will be acceptable if the designer can drain this area at a minimum 2% slope for 300 linear feet to the existing culvert and swale be 15 feet from edge of pavement.

8. Question: Can the design team propose alternate pavement sections that meet or exceed the structural coefficient of the proposed government pavement section?

Answer: Yes. Design team can propose, but Government does not have to accept

9. Question: Can the contractor propose alternate phasing for the project rather than what is shown in Attachment 4 provided two-way traffic is permitted at all times?

Answer: Yes.

10. Question: New Pavement section is 11” (6” Flex Base, 3” Type B Asphalt, 2” Type D Asphalt). Section 01 11 00 1.2.1.f and 1.2.1.g state to demolish the existing asphalt and base to the top of the proposed stabilized subgrade. Is the existing pavement section 11” thick or are we permitted to raise the finish grade of asphalt? Or are we expected to demo at minimum of 11” even if that includes removal of existing subgrade material?

Answer: No.

11. Question: SOW Section 01 11 00 Paragraph 1.2.2.1.e states that the contractor shall develop construction plans but that the specifications are provided by the government within this summary of work. The specifications that are provided are unedited with bracketed options for several items. Please confirm the contractor is responsible to edit the specifications that have been provided in the Statement of Work as part of the design process.

Answer: The brackets have been edited and filled in with what the Government wants. If there are brackets not filled in, please let us know, but a review of the specs did not find any brackets not filled in.

12. Question: Section 01 11 00 Paragraph 1.2.1.e.2 states that the 2-12” RCP are to be replaced with 1-18” HDPE. Please confirm that no hydrologic, hydraulic, or energy dissipation analysis is required as part of this replacement to confirm capacity and velocity.

Answer: Designer needs to confirm this pipe will work and recommend pipe size if it does not work.

13. Question: Section 01 11 00 Paragraph 1.2.1.e.2 states 2-12” RCP are to be replaced with 1-18” HDPE in the existing vehicle inspection area. After walking the site, we suggest removing the installation of a new culvert from the scope of work. There is not sufficient grade cover in that area for an 18” pipe and with the removal of the old inspection road there is no need for a drainage pipe. This area can be graded as a roadside ditch and provide a more efficient means of water conveyance and also result in a cost savings to the government. Please advise if it is acceptable to remove the 18” HDPE installation at the old inspection station.

Answer: This will be acceptable if the designer can drain this area at a minimum 2% slope for 300 linear feet to the existing culvert and swale be 15 feet from edge of pavement.

14. Question: Section 01 11 00 Paragraph 1.2.1.e.2 requires installation of 1-18” HDPE in the old vehicle inspection area. Please confirm length of this pipe is to be approximately

273.46 LF. As the vehicle inspection area is being removed, we want to ensure it is full length from start and stop of the existing 12” pipes.

Answer: Round length of pipe up or down to the nearest full section of pipe, i.e if pipe comes in 6 foot lengths divide 273.46 by 6, which equals 45.6, so use 46 lengths of 6 foot long, 18” pipe.

15. Question: Please provide the required cover of the new 18” HDPE storm drain pipe. The location of the intended installation of this pipe is in an area where achieving adequate cover will be a significant challenge and therefore want to confirm what coverage will be required.

Answer: Minimum cover 2-feet.

16. Question: Section 01 11 00 paragraph 1.2.1.f requires demolition of existing pavement by milling. What is the required milling depth?

Answer: The depth that removes the asphalt. We think it is about 4-inches.

17. Question: Section 01 11 00 paragraph 1.2.1.f requires demolition of existing pavement by milling. Milling is a typical procedure for repavement and undisturbed base. Since this is a full section removal, are we required to mill the pavement or is it acceptable to use other means of demolition?

Answer: This is a tight working space and is why milling was selected.

18. Question: Section 01 11 00 paragraph 1.2.2.5 provides precise parameters for subgrade stabilization utilizing Portland cement, 2% mix be weight. Section 1.2.1.h states stabilization can be done utilizing lime or cement. Please confirm whether we are to follow 1.2.2.5 or whether the geotechnical recommendation for subgrade stabilization parameters will be the basis of design.

Answer: Follow geotechnical engineer’s recommendation.

19. Question: Section 01 11 00 paragraph 1.2.2.9 states contractor shall construct new asphalt for Golf Cart Crossing. Please provide the section requirements for this area as base section or asphalt section aren’t specified. Is it to match the rest of the road?

Answer: There shall be a smooth surface transition from the road to the asphalt replace at the Golf Corse crossing. Use 3-inch thickness of asphalt in this location.

20. Question: On Attachment 1 at approximately Station 5+00 there is an existing culvert with headwalls that is about 10’ in length that is approximately 1’ outside the proposed pavement width. This area will create grading transition steep slopes as well as a dangerous edge in need of guardrail with a substantial dropoff just 1’ off the edge of the pavement.

Should a guardrail be installed at this location?

Answer: We are creating a wide shoulder at this location and do not expect motorists to drive along the edge of the shoulder. There is not one there now and we have had no problems.

21. Question: Attachment 4 dictates 3 phases and the order the phases are to be completed. It is acceptable to perform the phases in a different order as long as two lanes remain open?

Answer: No.

22. Question: Section 01 11 00 Paragraph 1.2.2.8 references a 49’ pavement section. Please confirm this is a typo.

Answer: Yes, it’s an error. Should be 40-ft not 49-ft.

23. Question: Section 1.2.2.10 states all striping shall be applied by a pavement marking line striping truck. Is it acceptable for the crosswalk to be hand striped?

Answer: No.

24. Question: Section 32 12 16 requires profilograph testing. This is typical of airfield pavements, not roadway projects. Pavement replacement projects such as this one are also bound by existing grades which may be out of tolerance to begin with. Should the profilograph requirement by removed from the specifications?

Answer: Yes.

25. Question: Section 32 12 13 paragraph 3.5 in the unedited spec in brackets requires the prime coat to cure for 48 hours or longer undisturbed. Please confirm this cure time is required in the specifications.

Answer: COSA and TXDOT specs do not specify and curing time for prime coat. Please have your Engineer make a recommendation of adequate cure time for Prime Coat.

26. Question: Does the proposed roadway profile need to match the existing roadway elevations/slope?

Answer: We would like it to be as close as possible and still maintain smooth lines and grades and cross-slope.

27. Question: Can the contractor manipulate the proposed roadway elevations for best project fit?

Answer: Yes, we would expect your engineer to do that.

28. Question: Can geogrid be used in lieu of cement/lime stabilization?

Answer: No.

29. Question: Is it acceptable to recycle existing materials for use in the base section?

Answer: No.

30. Question: Can TxDOT spec 260 “lime stabilization of existing material” be applied to proposed pavement section?

Answer: We want cement stabilization, unless the Geotech recommends lime based on their analysis of existing subgrade. They should be looking for Sulfates.

31. Question: Can TxDOT spec 275 “cement stabilization of existing material” be applied to proposed pavement section?

Answer: Yes, but Contractor’s Engineer needs to prove that it is superior to our spec.

32. Question: Can one-way traffic control be used with shadow vehicles?

Answer: No. We must have 2 way traffic flow.

33. Question: Can one-way traffic control be used with temporary traffic signals?

Answer: No. We must have 2 way traffic flow.

34. Question: Are Safety End Treatments required for the existing storm drainage structures?

Answer: Yes.

35. Question: Is existing topsoil permitted to be used onsite?

Answer: No.

36. Question: Can the government provide as-builts showing existing utilities in the area of the pavement?

Answer: No. We have Utility Base Maps and Tope Survey, which I will attach to this email.

37. Question: Section 01 35 29 paragraph 1.4.1.1 states that the Contractor Quality Control person and Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) can be the same person for this project.

Section 01 35 30 paragraph 1.3.9 states that the Superintendent may also be the SSHO.

Section 01 45 00.0 20 Paragraph 3.4.2.2 states the CQC System Manager may have duties as Site Superintendent in addition to Quality Control. Please confirm that it is acceptable for one individual to fulfill the duties of Site Superintendent, QC Manager, and SSHO.

Answer: QC Manager need to be a separate individual from the other duties.

38. Question: As this is a Design Build project we request that a minimum of 10 business days be provided prior to proposal submission from the date answers to questions have been provided.

Answer: No.

39. Question: Clin 0001 states TCP is due 30 days from NTP. It was noted during the site walk that leadership requires 90 days to review the TCP. How will this affect the project schedule?

Answer: We are planning for Contractor to have 30 days to prepare the plan, 30 days for the Base to review/approve the plan, 30 days for the Public Affairs Office to inform the Base public about the plan, a total of 90 days.

40. Question: CLIN 0002 reflects Engineering is due 90 days following NTP. Does this include government turnaround time?

Answer: Yes

41. Question: Section 52.2110-10 NTP for CLIN0003 (subgrade stabilization) and CLIN0004 (paving) are shown to be issued concurrently following acceptance and approval of CLIN0001 (Traffic Control Plans). However it is not possible to begin construction for CLIN0003 (subgrade stabilization) and CLIN0004 (paving) until CLIN0002 (surveying, geotech, and engineering work) is completed. Should the approval for CLIN0001 read CLIN0001 and CLIN0002? If not, where is the approval for CLIN0002?

Answer: Contractor shall develop a construction schedule that makes sense and allows for overlapping tasks to be completed if possible.

42. Question: 1.1 There are 4 items listed under preconstruction submittals. However section

1.1.1 under 01 33 00 has more items listed. Which is the correct list?

Answer: Both lists need to be done.

43. Question: 1.2.2.1 section h – requires 50%, 100%, and Construction engineering set. 3 submissions each requiring separate government approval. What is the government turnaround time?

Answer: Estimate 2 weeks each.

44. Question: 1.2.2.1 section h requires the contractor to submit specifications with the sealed set. However the government also references their specifications to be used. Does the government require new specifications? Is it acceptable to use the specifications provided by the government?

Answer: Use the Govt Specs.

45. Question: Summary of work section 1.6 Period of performance lists durations for tasks shorter than those listed in the CLIN. Are these durations suggested?

Answer: We had to combine some of these.

46. Question: Summary of work Section 1.6 Period of performance reflects 294 Calendar Days, while page 11 of 47 (Solicitation section 52.211-10) reflects 286 calendar days. What is the reason for the difference?

Answer: The correct Period of Performance is 286 days.

47. Question: How will the total delivery schedule be impacted with the mandatory 90-day review of the Traffic Control Plans?

Answer: Road construction cannot start until the project has been advertised for 30 days.

48. Question: Submittal procedure section 01 33 00 list Preconstruction Submittals which are required prior to the start of construction. Please confirm these are required prior to Construction efforts (CLIN0003 & CLIN 0004) and not prior to Design efforts (CLIN0001 & CLIN0002).

Answer: Confirm-prior to construction.

49. Question: Please confirm the NAS is not required for this project.

Answer: NAS –I do not recognize the acronym.

50. Question: Since section 01 32 01 : 3.3.1 indicates AF IMT 3064 form will be used as the normal requirement for the construction schedule of the task, please confirm that NAS and PDM are not required.

Answer: That is correct.

51. Question: Is it acceptable to provide the project schedule using MS Project?

Answer: No.

52. Question: Statement of Work (section 1.2.2 work plan requirements, item g) indicate plans shall be developed in Autocad 2011/2012 (dwg). However section 01 77 00 (1.4 Record Drawings) indicates drawings shall be developed in accordance with section 01 35 13.20, but no such section exists. Please confirm Autocad 2011/2012 is the required format.

Answer: Yes, this is the format.

53. Question: Work Hours – Can the contractor work between the hours of 5pm to 5am during the week?

Answer: No. However, Contractor can request through the Contracting Officer to work weekends and after normal duty hours.

54. Question: Work Hours – Can the contractor work between the hours of 5pm to 5am on the weekends?

Answer: No. However, Contractor can request through Contracting Officer to work weekends and after normal duty hours.

55. Question: Also, Specification 017823 is missing per the Table of Contents for Repair Nursery Road, Fort Sam Houston.

Answer: This submittal applies to mechanical equipment-not roads, so you do not need it, I apologize for any confusion this may have caused you.

56. Question: There are several items in the submital register that do not apply to this project.

Please confirm we are not responsible to provide submittals for items that do not apply to this project.

Answer: We can’t do that if we do not know which ones you mean. Please let us know, so we can determine if they do not apply.

4. Should you have any questions, please contact SrA Joseph Trevino, (210) 671-1712 or the undersigned at (210) 671-6083.

ANDREW S. SORENSEN

Contracting Officer