FA441721R0007 Questions and Answers - Repair MSA Lightning Protection System 4 Feb 2021.pdf

PDF 593 KB Posted

Attached to
MSA Lightning Protection System Repair
Solicitation number
FA441721R0007
Issued by

About this file

This document contains questions and answers related to Solicitation Number FA441721R0007 for repair of the Lightning Protection System at the Munitions Storage Area at Hurlburt Field, Florida. The contractor shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, supervision and equipment to repair the Lightning Protection Systems at nine buildings in accordance with drawings and specifications. Key details include that the period of performance is 180 calendar days from notice to proceed, the agency is the Department of the Air Force Special Operations Command, questions cover technical specifications and requirements for the lightning protection system installation and demolition work.

View the file

Other files

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

SOLICITATION NO. FA441721R0007

PROJECT NO. CP1038321 – Repair Munitions Storage Area (MSA) Lightning Protection System

Questions:

Question 1: Is the electrical service 1Ø or 3Ø for SPDs?

Answer: See construction drawings and Surge Suppression Device Notes for specific information.

Question 2: Note 2 on page E-204 indicates contractor to install new equipment described as single-phase in existing space at B90409. During the site visit, it was discovered that B90409 panel board is three-phase. Please advise on correct phase for B90409 and all other buildings receiving work.

Answer: Existing panel is 120/240V single phase.

Question 3: Is surge protection only specified for the main panels and not for communications or branch panels?

Answer: As shown on drawings, new surge suppression is only required for electric panels.

Question 4: For buildings with narrow driveways, 90413, 90416, 90419, and 90420, would it be permissible to drive a copper ground rod horizontal under the slab to prevent cutting and repairing the concrete?

Answer: Construct as shown on drawings.

Question 5: Once excavations are backfilled, are compaction tests required?

Answer: Compact in accordance with Sheet E-503 details. Test in accordance with industry standards and test reports are not required to be submitted.

Question 6: For 90407’s door bonding run, is connecting to the doors with mechanical connections permissible like the current installation? Typically, exothermic welding overhead, or above ground, is unsafe.

Answer: Door bonding must be in accordance with NFPA and AFI guidance. Bonding other than exothermic is allowed. Contractor can submit alternate methods during submittal process.

Question 7: Whether making exothermic or mechanical connections, the metal will have to be cleaned to base metal on all structures with metal, per NFPA 780-20 4.19.3. Are repainting surface areas required?

Answer: Surfaces must be restored to original condition to prevent corrosion.

Question 8: Per Test Well Detail on sheet E-503 the detail shows a compression connection to the ground rod. Should this be a mechanical connection (2 bolt LPS style) to allow for removal and reconnection during future testing?

Answer: Install per drawings.

Question 9: During the demolition of the integral LPS, are the components glued to the roof required to be removed or just the conductors and air terminals? Typically, once stuck with the M-1 or NP1 adhesives, these components do not want to come off. Prying off these components with priers could also pull the roof finish off.

Answer: Remove in accordance with General Note 6 on Sheet T-002. Do not remove adhesive bases as damage to roof may occur.

Question 10: Please confirm that proposals may be submitted electronically via the DoD SAFE Site.

Answer: Electronic submission via DoD SAFE site is one of three methods authorized. Please see Section L paragraph 2.1.1 for specific details to include requesting DoD SAFE drop.

Question 11: Drawing T-002 bullet 2 and specification section 01 14 00 paragraph 1.1 bullet D describes the contractor delivering a testing report on new lightning protection system to Hurlburt Electric Shop. It also states that the contractor may not begin construction on a new set of buildings until the Hurlburt Electric Shop has concluded testing. There is no defined timeline for the government testing to allow for advanced scheduling. This question is extremely critical to produce an accurate schedule for this solicitation. Please advise on the amount of time that Hurlburt Electric Shop will need to perform testing on each building.

Answer: Electric shop testing and acceptance will occur within one week of contractor notifying the government the system is fully installed and functional.

Question 12: Please confirm that the Superintendent may act as the Quality Control Manager and the Site Safety Officer on this project.

Answer: Yes, contractor’s discretion to utilize Superintendent as QC and/or Safety Officer if qualified to do so.

Question 13: Besides those called out for connection to the counterpoise, there is no reference to power lines, water lines, fiber optics, or any other utility. Please confirm that the site is clear of known underground hazards.

Answer: Known major utilities are shown on drawings. Other utilities may be identified during base digging permit process.

Question 14: Drawing E-503 shows the re-pouring of concrete to add #5 rebar dowels that are at least 12” long. Is it known what size rebar is currently in the concrete scheduled for demo?

Answer: Configuration of existing rebar is unknown.

Question 15: The demolition drawings have the contractor removing wooden poles. Please advise on whether any of these holes that are created upon removal of wooden poles require concrete fill or other

Answer: Contractor to fill holes with clean fill and restore surface to match surrounding area.

Question 16: On the calling out of demo the existing LP, there is an issue. Some of the buildings have the LP mounted to the existing roofs. If this material is to be demoed then damages will occur to current roofs and could possibly cause leaks. Is the LPS to be demoed?

Answer: In accordance with General Note 6 on sheet T-002, damage to existing roof is to be avoided and mount should not be removed if it will cause damage to roof.

Question 17: Specification calls for installation to follow NFPA 780. With most ammo facilities LPS for storage are to follow NFPA Chapter 8 for facilities that house or store explosive components. Will that need to take place for this project?

Answer: As stated in Spec section 26 41 00, NFPA 780 Chapter 8 Protection of Structures Housing Explosive Materials does apply.

Question 18: Specification section 01 57 19 Environmental Controls require the contractor to obtain a general permit for storm water discharge and create a Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).

This project will only have incidental digging/ground disturbance and should be under the 1-acre requirement for notification. Will the contractor still be required to obtain the general permit for storm water discharge and create a SWPPP?

Answer: Disturbance under 1-acre does not require a general permit.

Question 19: Specification section 01 57 19 Temporary Environmental Controls item 3.5.1 states to notify the Air Program Manager 6 months in advance of bringing any equipment on the installation so that Clean Air permits can be obtained. This will not work in the allotted time provided for completion of this work. Will the government require this to be completed?

Answer: Notification is only required for stationary power or fuel tanks. These should not be required for this project.

Question 20: The demolition drawings have the contractor removing wooden poles and setting new ones. There is no reference to an engineered lift plan in the drawings or specifications. Is it the intent of the government to have the contractor provide an engineered lift plan?

Answer: A lift plan is not a required government submittal.

Question 21: Drawing E-203 calls for directional bore of conduit under existing asphalt for installation of new secondary feeder. The specific conduit stated in the singe line diagram states a #4 – 1 1/2” rigid galv. steel conduit that is plastic coated. This conduit seems to call out for a plasti-bond conduit, which cannot be directionally drilled. Please advise if there is an alternate conduit for use on drawing E-203.

Answer: As shown in Single Line Diagram on Sheet E-203, HDPE conduit is to be used for directional boring.

Question 22: Specification section 01 78 00 subsection 3.2.1 Submittal states that the contractor must submit record drawings to include as-built shop drawings from fire alarm, fire suppression, structural/metal building, and lightning protection. Is it the government’s intent to have the contractor provide as-builts for fire alarm, fire suppression, structural/metal building, and lightning protection? If so, will the government be providing the as-builts as an AutoCAD file to assist these efforts?

Answer: Contractor only needs to provide as-builts for systems installed as a part of this contract.

Question 23: Specification section 01 50 00 subsection 2.1.1 Haul Roads states that the contractor must construct access and haul roads for proper prosecution of the work under this contract. Given the location and existing point of entry, it would be more practical to mobilize through the existing entrance to the munitions storage area. Additionally, the construction of haul roads will be difficult to fit into the prescribed time allotted by the government to complete this work. Is it the intent of the government to have the contractor construct and maintain haul roads under this contract?

Answer: Haul Roads will not be required for this contract. As shown in drawings, all facilities have paved access.

Question 24: Specification section 01 50 00 subsection 2.1.2 Barricades calls for the contractor to erect and maintain barricades to limit public access to the construction site. Is this specification necessary given the location of the proposed work site being already enclosed and the checkpoint to gain entry already established?

Answer: As stated in section 2.1.2, temporary barricades are required around hazardous areas.

Question 25: Specification section 01 50 00 subsection 2.1.3 Fencing calls for the contractor to provide fencing along the construction site at all open excavations. Is this specification necessary given the location of the proposed work site being already enclosed?

Answer: As stated in section 2.1.3, safety fencing must be provided at open excavations.

Question 26: Specification section 01 50 00 subsection 3.5.2 Administrative Field Offices calls for the contractor to provide and maintain field office facilities at the construction site. Given the scope of the project and the location of the project at Hurlburt Field, is the contractor required to provide and maintain field offices under this contract?

Answer: Contractor is to determine if field office facility is required, the government will not provide.

Question 27: Specification section 01 57 19 subsection 1.5.3 Environmental Manager calls for the contractor to appoint an Environmental Manager to the project site to coordinate compliance with federal, state, local and installation requirements. Given the scope of work, is this position required for this solicitation? If this position is required, can this position be fulfilled by the Superintendent?

Answer: The Superintendent may perform these duties.

Question 28: Specification section 01 57 19 subsection 1.5.4 Employee Training Records states that the contractor must train personnel to meet state requirements and conduct environmental/pollution control meetings prior to starting construction. There is no reference to the number of meetings to be held, what standard of training to apply and if these personnel to be trained also include any subcontractors. Is it the intent of the government to require the contractor to conduct specific environmental training under this contract? If so, will the government provide a standard for environmental training?

Answer: As stated in section 1.5.4, Contractor must meet state requirements. As stated in section 1.4.1, the installation environmental office can provide guidance if requested.

Question 29: Would the government allow the contractor to install the new wooden masts and lightning protection system on the applicable three buildings at a time while removing the overhead wires, then remove all the wooden masts at the end of the project simultaneously?

Answer: The poles cannot be removed at the end of the project. The full scope, including removal of the existing poles, must be accomplished while the facility is under the contractor’s control.

Question 30: Will the Government consider alternate lightning protection systems?

Answer: Designed LPS method in drawings is the approved method per Air Force Instruction. Alternate LPS method or approach will not be considered. Must install system shown in drawings and specs.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .