Attachment_28_QUESTIONS_&_ANSWERS_42-280.docx

SOLICITATION NO.: FA4800-16-R-0004

ATTACHMENT 28

AMENDMENT 02

QUESTION & ANSWERS

40. I understand that the 35% design as part of the MACC proposal package, will allow the 633d Contracting Squadron to see what kind of design you will expect from each bidder. But after the MACC award’s, if eight proposals are received for each TOPR, including eight designs, each costing say $10, to 15,000. But only one used. The other seven might spend $70, to 105,000 combined on proposal design with no compensation. Which would eventually drive up the price of future proposals.

And if each awardee would receive an equal number of awards, (unlikely but just for example) the seventh awardee might spend $70, to $105,000 before he received any income. And since you already plan to have additional contractors “On the ramp” you must be expecting contractors to drop out due to the high cost of proposal preparation on design build proposals. I would think that after five or six TOPR’s some, especially small contractors would cease providing TOPR’s, and per your requirement to “propose on 60 % of all TOPR’s”, be eliminated with no compensation at all for six figures of proposal cost. Which seems to be an unfair disadvantage to the smaller contractors.

Will you consider, that the seed project would include the requested 35% design? But each TOPR could include a written description of included tasks, and a firm price. And then after award the design would be provided?

It might reduce your overall, individual TOPR cost, and term cost of the program. And might provide you with more TOPR’s over the duration.

A. The MACC is built to include design builds to speed up the project. Currently we do not do a lot of design builds but want to have that avenue.

42. Attachment 01, Para 3.4.1 OFF RAMP PROCEDURES states that a contractor can be Off Ramped for “Failure to self-perform at least 25% of the work over a twelve month period of performance”. This is in direct conflict with the 15% self-performance requirement of FAR Clause 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting which is included by reference in the solicitation. Please clarify.

A. Attachment 01, para 3.4.1 has been changed to 15%

44. The expectation of the Solicitation is a Low Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) competition but the TOPR and SOW appear to indicate a Design Build competition. Without a common design (i.e. minimal design build), each contractor will be proposing on a different design to achieve the desired Statement of Work. This will produce an unbalanced competition. Please clarify the SOW as necessary to result in a common design. (i.e. basic floor layout, desired type/quality levels of sinks, toilets, showers, lighting, partitions, accessories, mirrors, flooring, ceilings, exhaust and heating systems, etc.)

A. The design effort is to show the Gov’t you have the an approach, this will be evaluated on a pass/fail.

45. Section L: Page 52, G/Volume 3 – Price, Section 2(a) states that we are to include Attachment 17 (AF Form 3052) in the Price Volume.

A. Correct

46. Section M: Page 57, Factor 1-Technical Acceptability, (5) states that we are to provide AF Form 3052 in the Technical Volume.

A. Correct

47. Can the Government please acknowledge that the requirement in Section G2. (5), 8(a) verification on page 53 of 60 in the RFP is only applicable if submitting as an 8(a) small business?

A. Correct

48. Can the Government please confirm the last day for questions? Page 47 of 60 in the RFP states we are required to submit questions 15 days prior to the RFP closing date, which makes it March 30, 2017, just 3 days after the site visit. We would like to suggest questions be due 7 days prior to the closing date, which would be April 7, 2017.

A. Questions are due 30 March 2017 at 1500.

49. Can the Government please confirm the due date of the Past Performance Information Sheets (PPIS) and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs)? Our proposal response is currently due April 14, 2017. On page 51 of 60, the due date for this volume is different. F.1. states the information shall be submitted 7 days prior to the solicitation date, and Section F.5. states the PPQs are due April 27, 2017 (after the proposal due date).

A. The PPIS is to be a part of the proposal due on 13 April. The last day PPQs will be accepted is 27 April 2017

50. Please confirm the Attachment referenced in Section E.3.b. on page 51 of 60 in the RFP should actually be Attachment 16, not Attachment 15.

A. Correct Attachment 16 is the Construction Progress Schedule

51. If including experience for a construction or design teaming partner, are we to include up to 3 recent contracts or up to 6 recent contracts? Section F.5.b. states 3, yet later in the section it states there is no limit to the number of PPI forms submitted.

A. Three per company and any for the Team, in addition CPARs will be looked at.

52. When the Government uses the term “contract” when discussing PPIS, are you referring to a single project, or are we allowed to submit contracts (contracts with multiple task orders, etc.) to demonstrate our experience managing multiple award contracts?

A. Yes. Task Order would be considered a single project

53. Is teaming partner experience weighted the same as the experience submitted from the company proposing as the Prime Contractor?

A. Yes

54. Please confirm that Price on page 57 of 60 in the RFP should be Factor 3.

A. No, Factor 2 is Pricing on page 57, these factors are for you information on how the solicitation will be

55. Can the Government please confirm the page count for Volume 1, Factor 1, Technical? On page 50 of 60 in the RFP, the page count says this Factor is limited to 20 pages with no page count requirement for design. On page 57 of 60 in the RFP (F.3.b.[2]) it states “provides a not to exceed 2 page overview that defines a reasonable approach to the seed project.”

A. Correct, therefore the total pages will be 22.

56. Attachment 2, General Provisions states in Section 1.1 that work may occur at Shaw AFB, SC and the Virginia Air National Guard in Richmond, VA. These two locations were not listed in Section 10 of the SF 1442. Can the Government please confirm whether or not work is anticipated at these two locations?

A. The Virginia Air Nation Guard has an office at Langley and is consider “…in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia.” As for Shaw they too could use this MACC.

57. Section E.3.a. on page 50 of 60 in the RFP references Attachment #15, Statement of Work. There was no Attachment 15 with the RFP package. Please confirm this reference should be Attachment 1, SOW Remodel FAM Camp Restroom F 50060, MUHJ 17-4005.

A. Correct.

58. As background, our team is made up of one JV prime (2 firms) and at least one subcontractor (1 firm). Per the below RFP text, do we provide 3 past performance (pp) contracts per the 2 JV firms, resulting in 6 contracts; or are we able to provide 2 pp contracts per the 2 JV firms and per the 1 subcontractor firm, resulting in 6 contracts? And, if we submit more than 6 pp contracts, will they all be evaluated?

A. Correct, as long as the subcontractor is identified on the JV, and we’ll be using CPARS

59. Page 51 of RFP: ‘Offerors shall submit information in accordance with Attachment #20, on at least three (3) but no more than six (6) RECENT contracts as the prime contractor considered most RELEVANT in demonstrating performance abilities on the proposed effort.’

‘Also, offerors shall include information, if applicable, on up to three (3) recent contracts performed by each joint venture or Teaming partner considered most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort.’

A. Correct

60. Regarding Factor 3 (Past Performance) the solicitation directs the offeror to use the Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) form and the Amendment 0001 responses #8 and #33 direct the offeror to provide projects within the past 3 years. In addition, the project range should be within $2,000 to $15M. Understanding the above, many government agencies use CCASS ratings to evaluate federal projects at the interim and completed performance periods. Can interim and completed CCASS ratings be provided in lieu of the PPQ form?

A. No interim CASS report, only completed.

61. May we submit DD2626 or completed PPQ forms that we have on projects that we wish to include? On some of them, the client POC for that particular project may not be working there any longer to fill out and send the Past performance forms directly to you.

A. No, only PPQs and we’ll pull the CPARS

62. Volume 1: Attachment 16 Contract Progress Report We are not able to open this attachment. Please advise what program is needed to open this document or resend in another format.

A. Will provide another version

63. Can we please substitute ACASS/CCASS, CPARS or previously received PPQs from our clients for new PPQs? We believe that asking our clients to do “fresh” PPQs for every submittal we make is a burden on them, when they have previously provided PPQs to us, or they have already filed CPARs.

A. Request a new PPQ.

64. Paragraph E.3.b. of Section L requires that a progress schedule be submitted. It further states that Attachment 15, AF Form 3064, Contract Progress Schedule, be utilized for this schedule. Can an alternate type schedule be used like MS Project or other? Much easier to prepare than AF Form 3064.

A. Use the AF Form 3064.

65. Volume II – Past Performance for the MACC at JBLE: If we have a final CCAA/CPARS for a project, may we include that in our proposal in lieu of asking the same client to complete a PPQ on our behalf?

A. No, provide a PPQ

66. Within Section L, there are a number of attachments that are to be submitted directly to the Contracting office from entities that complete these attachments. Examples are the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment #19), Financial Information Request (Attachment #21), and Bonding Information Request (Attachment #22). Is there anything regarding any of these attachments that the offeror should include in the proposal/binders? For example should the Financial Information Request less the information completed by the financial institution be included in the proposal? We just want to make sure that the Contracting office is aware that these various request were sent to others in case the Contracting office does not receive some of these.

A. You may provide a list to include POC name, agency, and phone number.

67. The solicitation currently indicates that this acquisition is an 8(a) set-aside. Please reference the following solicitation sections:

a.) Page 15, Clause 52.219-17, “SECTION 8(a) AWARD”;

b.) Page 16, Clause 52.219-18, “NOTIFICATION OF COMPETITION LIMITED TO ELIGIBLE 8(A) CONCERNS”;

c.) Page 31, Clause 252.219-7009, “SECTION 8(A) DIRECT AWARD”;

d.) Page 31, Clause 252.219-7010, “NOTIFICATION OF COMPETITION LIMITED TO ELIGIBLE 8(A) CONCERNS; and e.) Page 53, Volume 3 Price Proposal instructions, Paragraph #5: “8(a) verification from the cognizant Small Business Administration (SBA) office…”

FedBizOpps indicates that this is a Total Small Business Set-Aside. Additionally, clarification was provided in an earlier email from Ms. Powell that the solicitation is indeed a Total Small Business Set-Aside (i.e., it is not restricted to 8(a) entities). Will the solicitation be revised and amended to reflect the Total Small Business Set-Aside?

A. This is a Total Small Business Set-Aside to include 8(a)s, Joint Ventures, and Mentor Protégé.

68. Please provide the AF Form 3064 in a usable format. We are unable to open the AF Form 3064 that was provided on FBO, as it is an “xfd” file extension.

A. A different version will be provided

69. Page 50, under “D. Offers”, #2, asks for Primary Points of Contact using the “format shown in Attachment #20 of the Past Performance Information Sheet”. More specifically, does this mean you would like offerors to use the same format for our in-house Primary Points of Contact as that shown in PPIS Section G, “Primary Customer Points of Contact”?

A. Correct

70. Please provide the Langley standard cover sheet in AutoCAD format for the drawings (reference: Section 3.8.3 of the Design-Build SOW).

A. Not required for Seed Project. This information will be provide with each TORP

71. Reference Section L, Volume 2- Past Performance, #6 “Specific Content” (page 52 of RFP). Does the government wish to see this information within Section D of the PPIS form or as a separate narrative under a different tab?

A. Yes

72. Attachment 01, Para 3.4.1 OFF RAMP PROCEDURES states that a contractor can be Off Ramped for “Failure to self-perform at least 25% of the work over a twelve month period of performance”. This is in direct conflict with the 15% self-performance requirement of FAR Clause 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting which is included by reference in the solicitation. Please clarify.

A. Corrected to read 15%

73. The Performance Periods listed in the Task Order Proposal Request (TOPR) are unclear. The Design Performance Period is listed as N/A. The Construction Performance Period is listed as 365 calendar days from Construction NTP and 90 days from NTP. Please clarify.

A. Amendment 02, Revised SOW 3.11. Will be defined after award

74. The expectation of the Solicitation is a Low Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) competition but the TOPR and SOW appear to indicate a Design Build competition. Without a common design (i.e. minimal design build), each contractor will be proposing on a different design to achieve the desired Statement of Work. This will produce an unbalanced competition. Please clarify the SOW as necessary to result in a common design. (i.e. basic floor layout, desired type/quality levels of sinks, toilets, showers, lighting, partitions, accessories, mirrors, flooring, ceilings, exhaust and heating systems, etc.)

A. All are provided the same documents to provide a 35% design and price to 100% and price to construct.

75. Can a previously completed PPQ be sent to 633 CONS from the Gov poc that has already completed the PPQ?

A. No, request it be on the forms provided

76. Will 633 CONS review interim CPARS reports?

A. No, final/completed only.

77. Section L, para E.3.b last sentence and Section M, para F.3.b.(5) require the contractor to include a filled out “Schedule of Values” for the project. Question: Is the Schedule of Values referred to an AF 3065 or other standard form? If a standard form is desired can it be provided in electronic format?

A. Yes, and a different version will be provided.

78. May we include in our Volume 2 proposal a completed CPARS or CCASS Evaluation in lieu of asking a customer to complete and submit a PPQ?

A. No. request it be on the forms provided

79. Please reference page 50, Section E. Volume 1 - Technical, 1(c). "Page Limitation: Unlimited for the 35% design as described below, 20 pages for all else." Question: Could you please define what "all else" is? It is our understanding that the 35% design is comprised of the requirements in paragraphs 3(a), 3(b), and 3(c) on pages 50-51 of the solicitation.

A. Mostly para 3 (b)

80. Is the construction estimate on the AF 3052 form required for the 35% submission or do we just fill in the bid form?

A. Yes, the AF 3052 is required

81. Is the AF Form 66, Submittal Resister required with the 35% submission on the SEED project?

A. You’re to provide with 35%

82. Is the Warranty Schedule required with the 35% submission on the SEED project?

A. Yes.

83. Will the 35% SEED project submission require three (3) copies and one (1) CD copy?

A. No one hard copy and one CD

84. Does the 35% SEED design submission go the 633 Contracting Squadron/LGCB office?

A. Yes, everything comes to 633d Contracting Squadron

85. Is the Payment Monitoring Plan required for the 35% SEED design submission?

A. Not Required, per Amendment 02, Revised SOW

86. Please confirm that the 35% SEED project will require all submittal requirements noted in Section 3.4.1 – 3.4.7 of the Design /Build Statement of Work.

A. Submittals are required at 100% design, AF Form 66 Submittal Register is required at 35%

87. Due to the site visit occurring seventeen (17) calendar days before bid day and RFIs closing fourteen (14) calendar days before bid day; can the bid date be extended ten (10) days to allow enough time to design, develop and subcontractor price the 35% drawings. Per the Design/Build statement of work typically thirty (30) days is allowed to produce a 35% set of documents. We may not have all RFIs answers back until seven (7) days before bid date and that will not allow enough time to produce a competitive bid and thorough design for the end user.

A. Noted

88. Volume 2: Past Performance - It was mentioned in the site visit that previously filled out PPQ’s could be sent in place of Attachment 20 – Past Performance Information Sheet as long as it was sent in directly to you from the Contracting Officer for each project submitted. Can you please confirm if this is the case or if we are required to use Attachment 20 – Past Performance Information Sheet per the original solicitation?

A. Correct

89. We are currently working on writing the Technical Approach to the Design-Build Seed Project for the above-referenced solicitation, and we have found what appears to be an inconsistency between the solicitation’s Section E., Instructions for the Volume I Technical requirements and Section M., Evaluation Factors for the Technical Approach.

Section E. states: “Page Limitation: Unlimited for 35% design as described below, 20 pages for all else.”

The requirements for this volume include:

Complete 35% Construction Design (no page limit) Procedures, Processes and Methods for Tracing the Progress of the Project and Interface with the Government Overall Performance Time for Design/Construction Phases Composition of Design-Build Team Attachment 15, AF Form 3064 Schedule of Values List of Assumptions

Section M states the requirements as:

(1) includes all the required work elements listed in Attachment #15, MACC Seed Project Statement of Work

(2) provides a not to exceed 2 page overview that defines a reasonable approach to the seed project;

(3) clearly identifies members of the design-build team by their title, to include major subcontractors, and describe the roles of each in the execution of the project;

(4) correctly fill out Attachment 16, AF Form 3064, Contract Progress Schedule, showing a logical work sequence and work element percentage;

(5) provides an AF Form 3052, Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown, and Schedule of values that assigns percentages to work performed in all divisions required in the execution of the project. Progress schedule reflects a critical path that accounts for long lead items, design time, Government submittal review time, and project closeout using the performance period specified in the seed project.

QUESTION: Please clarify which portion of the requirements is limited to 2 pages -- or is this a typo that should say “20” rather than 2?

A. Total will be 22

90. Section L Subsection C. Proposal Instructions, E. Volume 1- Technical , Para 3a. Please clarify that bidders have to submit 35% design as a part of their proposal.

A. Yes, a 35% design is a part of the proposal

91. The solicitation has a requirement to abate all lead and asbestos. In absent of Hazardous Material Survey this work can not be quantified using the bid documents. Please consider establishing an estimated quantity or unit price that can be used in the bid.

A. See Amendment 02, Revised SOW.

92. Upon award of the seed project to the successful bidder, is it anticipated that the 35% design review meeting, in accordance with the TOPR’s section 1.7.1.2, will performed based on the design submitted during solicitation?

A. Correct

93. During the Pre-Proposal Conference it was stated that there was no Hazardous Waste Testing or removal required for this “seed Project” other than mold in restroom showers, yet this was not formally removed from the TOPR with Amendment 01. Please confirm that Hazardous Waste Testing for asbestos, lead based paint and other hazardous wastes is not required for this “seed Project”.

A. See Amendment 02, Revised SOW, lead and asbestos are removed.

94. Section L Subsection C. Proposal Instructions, F. Volume 2, Para 5. Past Performance questionnaire: Please clarify relevant projects: What is most important criteria, If all are important what is the weightage of the different relevancy?

A. Relevant is construction type work.

95. Reference to Originals made in the RFP, but only specified 1 hard copy for each volume.

A. Correct one hard copy and one CD

96. In reference to preparing the 20 pages for the design narrative on Page 50, Section E. Volume 1- Technical, paragraph 3 subparagraph b, we understand that the following must be included Design Approach Design build team composition and their involvement Attachment 16 3064 & schedule of Values Provide a listing of any and all assumption pertaining to the seed project. However, in the Elevations Factors page 56 &57, paragraph 3, Factor 1-Technical Acceptability, subparagraph b. we understand that the following additional information should be included: “Provide a not to exceed 2 page overview that defines a reasonable approach to the seed project”, “provides an AF 3052, Construction cost estimate breakdown” Are we to assume that there should be a separate 2 page overview in addition to the 20 page design narrative included in Factor 1 Technical Binder and if so is the 2 page overview included in the page count of 20?

A. Correct, making a total of 22 pages

97. Additionally the RFP requests that attachment 17 3052 construction cost estimate breakdown be included in the Price Binder. Is it the intent of the RFP for the offer to include the 3052 construction cost estimate in both the Technical Binder and the Price Binder?

A. Correct, the 3052 is to be in both

98. In Amendment 0001, the answer to Question 8 reduced the RFP stated relevant recent project requirement for past performance to 3 years. This response does not appear to answer the question that was asked. Please consider changing the relevant recent project requirement back to 5 years. The 3 year period does not allow small businesses to present the government with its most diverse range of relevant projects. Will the government change the time period for relevant past performance to 5 Years?

A. No, three years is standard. IAW FAR Part 10 relevancey is 3 years.

99. Will the government allow submission of recent projects that are not 100% complete? If the answer is yes, please provide percent complete requirement by the solicitation issue date. Typically 80% is used in other MACC solicitations.

A. No

100. On the PPQ Form, attachment 18 is the contractor/offer supposed to fill out section 1 &2 of the PPQ before sending to the evaluator?

A. Correct

101. During the site visit the question was asked if a CCAS was available for past performance could it be used in lieu of the PPQ form. The answer given was yes, please confirm.

A. Correct

102. During the site visit, it was mentioned that the Pre-Bid RFI deadline is 3-30-17 but Amendment #1, Attachment 15, published a Pre-Bid RFI deadline of 4-3-17. Please clarify.

A. Deadline for question is 30 March 2017

103. Amendment #1, Attachment 15, "Design Performance Period" reads in part "Design: N/A calendar days. Construction: 365 days following the issuance of the Construction NTP". Please clarify the duration of the Design Performance Period.

A. Amendment 02, Revised SOW, to be defined after award

104. For PPQ’s, are only Federal projects to be submitted?

A. PPQ’s can be from the State as well

105. If a major subcontractor is planned to be utilized, does a teaming agreement need to be in place?

A. Yes

106. If a subcontractor design firm is planned to be utilized, does a teaming agreement need to be in place?

A. No, if they are a subcontractor teaming is not required.

107. We were instructed the RFP’s Section H is in Attachment 01 – Special Contract Requirements. But we do not find this section in Attach 01; please advise.

A. This is posted in Federal Business Opportunities with the solicitation, Atch 01.

108. If there is a JV between two companies and another teaming partner, is it allowable to submit (9) total projects which is more than the (6) allowable?

A. Correct, as long as all three companies are listed on the JV

109. Shall these reports be submitted to Mr. Barrett via courier mail or e-mail? Also, shall the "electronic" copy to the 633 CES/CENM, Project Manager be submitted via e-mail or compact disk (CD)? Please clarify.

A. Not at this time. This will be determined at award

110. Is there a specific / preferred software (i.e., primavera, MS Projects, etc.,) required to provide the Construction Schedule? Shall this Construction Schedule be provided in .pdf and / or .xer / .mpp extention?

A. Currently we’re using the AF 3064

111. Will all projects, including the seed project, be exempt from state sales & use tax?

A. No

112. Will a tax exempt certificate be issued by the Air Force?

A. No,

113. Is a bid bond required for the Seed Project?

A. No

114. Please confirm the order of the volumes, the RFP lists multiple places as 1. Tech, 2. Past Performance and 3. Price, however page 56 lists 1. Technical, 2. Price and 3. Past Performance.

A. As listed in Section L – Volume 1 is Technical, Volume 2 is Past Performance and Volume 3 is Price. Section M explains the Evaluation Factors

115. At the site visit a revised SOW was discussed. Will the revised SOW be published as an amendment? If so, will the government consider extending the proposal due date.

A. Yes

116. If the proposal is being hand-delivered, what is the procedure for gaining base access? Or, will someone be available to meet at the Visitor’s Center, etc.

A. If no one will be at the Visitior’s Center, a one day pass will be issued. The company will provide to Ms. Powell the name and birthdate of the individual delivering the RFP.

117. We respectfully request that pricing not be submitted on CD at time of bid per page 52 of the RFP Section G.

A. Pricing is to be included on the CD

118. Please clarify if past performance must be completed projects or can also include current projects? If current projects are allowed what percent complete must be attained to be acceptable?

A. Current are acceptable with not limit on the percent complete.

119. If we have a CPARS, do we also need to submit a PPQ or is a CPARS acceptable?

A. Submit PPQ, we the government will pull CPARS.

120. Please confirm that we are to price the seed project to include 100% of the design completion and a 100% complete construction; and as part of our response we are to include the actual design submittal at 35% completion.

A. Correct price the project as a 100% effort

121. Please define the evaluation factors as stated at the site visit as that is slightly different than what is written in the solicitation.

A. The proposal will be racked by lowest offeror; the lowest 16s designs will be evaluated pass/fail; the past performance will be evaluated

122. Is the submission of recent relevant contracts by a teaming partner to include the design team or only construction partners? If so are they also required to submit Past Performance Questionnaires?

A. Yes

123. Are we to design for a new heater in the Laundry room?

A: Yes. Although not clear in the SOW, you are to design for all three heaters to be new technology. These three are the ones in each shower room, and the one in the laundry room. All three are to be identical for easier logistics.

124. Are we to design for a new wash tub in the Laundry room?

A: No. The existing stainless steel washtub/s are adequate and are to remain.

125. Are we to design for new screening for the “porch” of the showers/laundry facility?

A: No. The screen will be replaced later, by a separate contract. Do not design to replace it.

126. Are we to design to repair and repaint the gutters and the down spouts?

A: No. Design to paint the exposed wood siding and fascia boards, but not the gutters or down spouts.

127. Are we to design to repair or replace the vents in the CMU walls of the shower rooms?

A: No. Design to paint the existing vents from inside and outside the facility. You may assume that the existing vents are functioning properly.

128. SOW is unclear about new locks for the two shower room doors and for the north-side main entrance door. Are we to design to install BEST lock cores or keyless combination locks?

A: Design to install keyless combination locks, but these are to be approved by the Langley AFB Lock Smith.

129. Do interior and/or exterior plumbing, electrical, mechanical and/or fire safety as-built drawings exist for building F50060? If so, can they be made available?

A. Yes. The 1992 (revised in 1998) scanned drawings will/are available for download. Contracting decides what website, and when the various documents will be ready for download.

130. Is there a current hazardous material (i.e. asbestos/lead/mold) survey for building F50060? If so, can it be made available?

A. No, there is no hazardous material (i.e. asbestos/lead/mold) survey, abatement or remediation report, for building F.50060. For purposes of the 35% design, assume there is no hazardous material within the facility.

131. In the Task Order Statement of Work (SOW), please clarify what level of “resistance to damage caused by flooding and vandalism” is required in Para 1.3.7.

A. Drywall shall be mold and water proof materials.

132. Is electronic access to the JBLE Langley Architectural Design Compatibility Standards available ?

A. No. This project does not need to adhere to the Langley AFB architectural standards.

133. Please confirm that the Government will remove, store and re-install the cameras located on the exterior of the shelter?

A. Confirmed. The building users will remove prior to renovation.

134. During the site visit several holes were noticed in the screen porch screening and on the trim. Please confirm that no repairs are required for the screen porch?

A: The screen will be replaced later, by a separate contract. Do not design to replace it.

135. Is the main door, as identified at the site visit, required to meet ADA requirements?

A. Widening the hallway is not to be included in this project. The door inside the screened “porch” may be converted to be ADA compliance, if necessary, instead of the right side entrance door. In the event the screen area door is made ADA compliant, the combination lock with BEST lock override is to be placed on the new ADA compliant door. The lock in the right side entrance door is to remain as-is.

136. The existing right-side entry width will not meet the ADA / ABA requirements for access. In order to create ADA / ABA access, we would need to remove structural CMU walls and widen the hallway. Please confirm that the existing entry width will remain and no widening is required of this SEED project submission.

A. Widening the hallway is not to be included in this project. The door inside the screened “porch” may be converted to be ADA compliance, if necessary, instead of the right side entrance door. In the event the screen area door is made ADA compliant, the combination lock with BEST lock override is to be placed on the new ADA compliant door. The lock in the right side entrance door is to remain as-is.

137. Please confirm what level of vandalism design is required for the toilet partition and accessories?

A. Difficult to scratch, easy to wipe clean, and easy to repair.

138. Is there an existing Lead and/or Abatement report available for review for the FAM Camp Restroom?

A. No.

139. The RFP states to Prep and Paint the exterior walls, trim, and soffits of the entire facility; however, at the site visit it was mentioned that the exterior was to be resurfaced. Please define the government expectations of the exterior work.

A. The trim and T-111 siding on the facility are to be repaired before painting the exterior. The gutters are also to be replaced. The trim behind the gutters is to be painted.

140. There are numerous locations where exterior trim and T1-11 panels are damaged due to age, rot, or animal intrusion; is it the government intent to prep and paint over this or is any repair required.

A. The trim and T-111 siding on the facility are to be repaired before painting the exterior.

141. Does the government require the same number of fixtures in the restrooms or is meeting ADA requirements a higher priority?

A. If necessary to meet ADA requirements, a toilet or shower may be eliminated from each shower room. We prefer to lose a shower.

142. The main door does not provide ADA maneuvering clearances without modifications to the building walls. Will the entrance through the screened porch be allowed to meet the ADA access requirement?

A. Widening the hallway is not to be included in this project. The door inside the screened “porch” may be converted to be ADA compliant, if necessary, instead of the right side entrance door. In the event the screen area door is made ADA compliant, the combination lock with BEST lock override is to be placed on the new ADA compliant door. The lock in the right side entrance door is to remain as-is.

143. The T-111 siding and trim are in somewhat poor condition. We understand the scope to be prep and painting only. We assume this to be nailing down loose boards, but no material replacement. Please confirm.

A. The trim and T-111 siding on the facility are to be repaired before painting the exterior. The gutters are also to be replaced. The trim behind the gutters is to be painted.

144. There is water damage to the ceiling in a couple of areas within the scope of work. The RFP does not call for repairs. Confirm that minor prep is acceptable prior to painting.

A. Confirmed. Assume the roof leaks have been repaired. Minor prep is acceptable prior to painting.

145. To meet ADA, it will require combining toilet and shower stalls in Men's and Women's toilets, and losing a minimum of one fixture in each room. Is it acceptable to maintain the number of water closets, and reduce the number of showers?

A. If necessary to meet ADA requirements, a toilet or shower may be eliminated from each shower room. We prefer to lose a shower.

146. Does the User have a preference between roll-in showers and transfer showers for ADA use?

A. No. The designer is to select which style is to be used.

147. Part 3 Design Documents and Schedule is quite specific regarding design deliverables. It seems that this has been provided for the project as a whole, and should not necessarily be followed for the 35% drawing submission at this time. For example, outline specifications are required in Part 3 for the 35% submission. Are notes on the drawings an acceptable alternative?

A. Outline specifications are required for the 35% submission.

148. We understand that temporary toilets are to be provided during construction. Please verify that the work areas will be closed, and non-work areas will be occupied, and that construction will not be phased?

A. No showers are needed for temporary use during the renovation. Campers will do without showers as necessary. Only provide two porta-potties, at least one of which is handicap accessible. The work areas will be closed, and non-work areas will be occupied, and that construction will not be phased.

149. Is there a materials preference for the exterior signs?

A. Rustic/cabin image in front of building. Aluminum plates preferred.

150. Is there a preferred type and manufacturer for the combination locks?

A. No, however locks are to be approved by the Langley Locksmith. Suggest use brand common in other buildings on Langley.

151. The RFP requires destructive testing to uncover hidden conditions (such as plumbing chases) prior to construction. Please confirm that this is not a part of the 35% submission.

A. Confirmed. Destructive testing is not a part of the 35% design submission.

152. Please clarify the scope of work regarding existing Fire Alarm Systems A. The current fire alarm system is not to be upgraded. The existing fire alarm system is to be maintained in operation throughout construction.

153. Please provide Title block for 35% drawings submission.

A. The standard Langley title block and cover sheet in AutoCAD (DWG) format will/are available for download. Contracting decides what website, and when it will be ready for download.

154. Attachment 02, General Provisions, Section 4.1 states: "Drawings shall be furnished on 24" x 36" (Arch D size) sheets using standard Langley title block with drafting on the front of sheets". Please provide the standard Langley title block in AutoCAD (DWG) format.

A. The standard Langley title block and cover sheet in AutoCAD (DWG) format will/are available for download. Contracting decides what website, and when it will be ready for download.

155. SOW requires the current ADA requirements to be met. Currently, the entrance to the main facility does not meet this requirement. Please verify that we are to make the interior of the restrooms, corridor and laundry spaces ADA Code compliant.

A. The corridor and the laundry spaces do not need to be made ADA compliant.

156. SOW says to upgrade ‘facility’ to meet current fire safety requirements. However at the site visit, it was stated that we are not to include this in our scope of work, please clarify.

A. The ceiling in all rooms involved can be assumed to be compliant with current fire codes. The current fire alarm system is not to be upgraded. No sprinklers are to be added to the building. The existing fire alarm system is to be maintained in operation throughout construction.

157. Please provide the latest edition of the “JBLE–Langley Electrical, Fire, and Communications Design Standards – latest edition”.

A. These specifications are not required for this project.

158. During the Pre-Proposal Conference, it was stated that additional ‘As builts’ would be posted for the teams. When are these existing Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing drawing files going to be distributed to the design teams for reference?

A. The 1992 (revised in 1998) scanned drawings will/are available for download. Contracting decides what website, and when the various documents will be ready for download.

159. Is the space temperature currently monitored by the EMCS System, or is this something new that will need to be provided in the design? This can be provided if it does not exist, but based on the proposed new work and the requirements listed in the Statement of Work, Section 3.1.3, current EMCS functions will remain as currently installed if already in the building.

A. That is correct.

160. The SOW does not address the existing water heaters. Is it the intent to keep these, or provide new water heaters?

A. The intent is to keep the existing water heaters.

161. Is it the intent to replace the existing laundry’s washers and dryers?

A. No.

162. In the TOPR Section “3.8.2.2 Develop the Following JBLE – Langley Specifications Sections as Typical Parts of the Contract Documents:…” the it goes on to list Section 01 11 00, Section 01 12 00, Section 27 10 10, Section 28 31 65 and Section 28 31 66. Can JBLE provide the .sec files for these sections?

A. We will provide Sections 01 11 00 and 01 12 00.

163. Upon review of the SoW it does not appear that there is any civil site work proposed for this project, can JBLE please confirm?

A. Correct. There are no civil site work.

164. During the Pre-Proposal Conference it was stated that there was no Hazardous Waste Testing or removal required for this “seed Project” other than mold in restroom showers, yet this was not formally removed from the TOPR with Amendment 01. Please confirm that Hazardous Waste Testing for asbestos, lead based paint and other hazardous wastes is not required for this “seed Project”.

A. No hazardous material waste testing is required for the seed project.

165. The “Air Force Engineering Technical Letter ETL 01-1, Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) Design Checklist” is referenced as a design standard in TOPR Section 1.5.6 DESIGN STANDARDS. Further, section 1.5.6 indicates “Design shall be in accordance with current Engineering Technical Letters (ETLs) and ACC Standards”. However, according to the WBDG AFETL Index the referenced ETL 01-1 was canceled on 22 Feb 17. Please verify if the referenced ETL 01-1 applies to this project.

A. The most current ETL is applied to this project.

166. The TOPR SoW section 1.3 CONSTRUCTION SCOPE OF WORK indicates item “6. Satisfy current American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements”. Please confirm that this requirement is the Facility 50060 building and not to the facility site amenities.

A. The ADA requirements apply to both building and site amenities.

167. The TOPR SoW section 1.3 CONSTRUCTION SCOPE OF WORK indicates item “8. Upgrade facility to meet current fire safety requirements”. However, during the Pre-Proposal Conference it was stated that no Fire Alarm or beacon improvements are required for this project other than exit signs, and Amendment 01 did not remove this requirement. Please confirm that the only scope required for the existing fire alarm system is that it be maintained in operation throughout construction.

A. Confirmed. The ceiling in all rooms involved can be assumed to be compliant with current fire codes. The current fire alarm system is not to be upgraded. No sprinklers are to be added to the building. The existing fire alarm system is to be maintained in operation throughout construction.

168. Please confirm that screened-in porch area is excluded from the SoW to include replacement of the screens.

A: Confirmed. The screen will be replaced later, by a separate contract. Do not design to replace it.

169. Please confirm that storage area is excluded from the SoW to include the equipment and panels that reside therein.

A. Storage area is excluded from the SOW.

170. Mechanical: Are original construction drawings (A/S/P/M and E) available? If renovations have been performed are these construction drawings available?

A. Yes. The 1992 (revised in 1998) scanned drawings will/are available for download. Contracting decides what website, and when the various documents will be ready for download.

171. Bid Item 0002 indicates only the exhaust and heating systems are to be renovated. However, under paragraph 3.1.7, the engineer will include analysis of the impact of the renovation on the existing mechanical systems where changes are made by the contractor. This would include any mechanical cooling systems. Will the AC systems be made part of the work of this project?

A. No.

172. Temporary showers and toilets are to be provided while permanent facilities are being renovated. What is envisioned by the government?

A. No showers are needed for temporary use during the renovation. Campers will do without showers as necessary. Only provide two porta-potties, at least one of which is handicap accessible. The work areas will be closed, and non-work areas will be occupied, and that construction will not be phased.

173. Is this facility to be LEED Certified? The SOW doesn’t appear to place this project in a ‘major renovation’ category.

A. No.

174. Has the facility been tested for Hazardous Materials; asbestos, lead paint, etc.? If so, is a copy of the survey report / remediation effort available?

A. There is no hazardous material (i.e. asbestos/lead/mold) survey, abatement or remediation report, for building F.50060. For purposes of the 35% design, assume there is no hazardous material (asbestos/lead) within the facility. The 35% design is to include removing (abating) the mold in the showers, and nowhere else.

175. Paragraphs 3.4.2 and 3.4.5 appear to be in conflict; requiring at the 35% submittal both an outline and an edited specification for the mechanical and electrical disciplines. The same conflict exists for the 65% submittal in paragraphs 3.5.2 and 3.5.5. Which type of specification is required at the 35% and 65% submittals?

A. Specifications titles are required at 35% submittal.

176. Unusual requirements: “The A-E shall also provide the drawings on at least one CD with building and survey information in Metric Dimensions…” see paragraph 3.8.3. (Hard or soft metric?)

A. Disregard any mention of metric dimensions.

177. Electrical/Telecom: Is replacement of the existing CCTV system included in the project?

A. No.

178. Are occupancy sensors desired in the renovated areas?

A. No.

179. Fire Protection: During the site visit, it was mentioned that the existing Fire Alarm system was not to be touched during this project. But, in the RFP under the Design-Build Statement of Work (Paragraph 1.3, Item 8), it indicates to “Upgrade facility to meet current fire safety requirements.” Please confirm that discussion during site visit was accurate.

A. The ceiling and doors in all rooms involved can be assumed to be compliant with current fire codes. The current fire alarm system is not to be upgraded. No sprinklers are to be added to the building. The existing fire alarm system is to be maintained in operation throughout construction.

180. Plumbing: Under the Design-Build Statement of Work (Paragraph 1.3, Item 1), it gives a comprehensive list of the different items within the restrooms to be replaced, but it does not indicate urinals. Are the urinals to be remain as-is or are they to be removed and replaced as well?

A. The urinals are to be replaced.

181. The scope of work states to only replace floors and lighting in the laundry room. Are the existing plumbing fixtures (i.e. floor drain, sink, washer wall box, etc.) within the laundry room to remain? Is the existing unit heater in the laundry room to remain?

A. The existing plumbing fixtures (i.e. floor drain, sink, washer wall box, etc.) within the laundry room are to remain. The laundry room heater is to be replaced and is to match the new heaters in the shower rooms.

182. Is there an existing Energy Monitoring and Control System (EMCS) as described in Section 3.1.3? If so, is the new mechanical equipment required to be connected? If there is not a EMCS, is one required and is the existing equipment required to be on the new EMCS?

A. There is no EMCS at F.50060. There is no need to add one in this project.

183. Section 3.1.4 requires the upgrading and labeling of panels. Is this a requirement as the panels look to be in good, working condition?

A. There is no need to upgrade electrical panels in this project.

184. LEED v2.2 is referenced under the Codes and Standards. Are we required to register and be certified through LEED? If so, LEED v2.2 and v2009 are no longer available to be registered unless this project has been previously registered.

A. No. LEED registration and certification is not required.

185. Will the Government accept a design proposal that reduces the fixture count of toilets and showers by one in each Men’s and Women’s shower/bathroom in order to meet current ADA accessibility codes?

A. If necessary to meet ADA requirements, a toilet or shower may be eliminated from each shower room. We prefer to lose a shower.

186. Is it the Government’s intent to require the contractor to design and replace the existing ventilation in the Men’s and Women’s shower/bathrooms with a powered ventilation fan system?

A. Yes. Existing ductwork is to be used. Ventilation system is to run only when the lights are on.

187. Is it the Government’s intent for the contractor to design and install a new HVAC system complete with heat and A/C to supply the Men’s, Women’s bathrooms, Hallway, and Laundry rooms?

A. No. There is no need for A/C in this project.

188. Is it the Government’s intent to require the contractor to demolish the existing masonry toilet and shower partitions?

A. No, with the exception that a masonry wall may be demolished to comply with ADA requirements, within each of the shower rooms.

189. During the walkthrough it was discussed that no new fire alarm work would be required. Per the SOW the contractor is to upgrade the facility to meet the current fire safety requirements. Does the existing fire alarm system meet the current fire safety requirements?

A. The current fire alarm system is not to be upgraded. The existing fire alarm system is to be maintained in operation throughout construction.

190. During the walkthrough it was discussed that the emergency lighting would need to be replaced. The SOW does not specifically state to replace this lighting. Is it the Government’s intent for the Contractor to design and replace the current emergency lighting system?

A. Yes.

191. Is it the Government’s intent for the Contractor to replace the ceiling in the Men’s and Women’s shower/bathroom or repair as needed?

A. Repair as needed. Assume all ceilings are to be Fire code compliant.

192. What is the current construction of the existing ceilings in the shower rooms, hallway, and laundry?

A. See 1992 As-built drawings. Joists for attic floor are bearing on the tops of the masonry walls. Ceilings are fastened to the bottom of these joists. Assume the ceilings comply with current fire code requirements.

193. Do the existing ceilings in the shower rooms, hallway and laundry meet current fire code standards?

A. Assume the ceilings comply with current fire code requirements.

194. Is it the Government’s intent for the Contractor to design and provide a new wet pipe sprinkler system?

A. No. No sprinklers are to be included in this project.

195. Do the existing CMU walls extend above the existing ceilings?

A. No. See 1992 As-built drawings. Joists for attic floor are bearing on the tops of the masonry walls. Ceilings are fastened to the bottom of these joists. Assume the ceilings comply with current fire code requirements.

196. Per the RFP the flooring in the Hallway, Shower rooms and laundry are to be replaced. Please specify the type of new flooring the contractor is to install in each area?

A. Vinyl composite tile (VTC) is acceptable for new flooring in the hallway and the laundry room. If masonry wall/s need to be demoed to adjust size of toilet and shower areas, entire floor is to be refloored with ceramic tile.

197. Per the requirements provided in Attachment 2 Section 4.1, will the Government provide the…