Consolidated Q and A.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 13 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Tyndall AFB Storm Water Drainage Repair
- Solicitation number
- FA481922R0011
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
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
Sheet1
| Questions | Answers |
| RCP and HDPE pipe are mentioned within the solicitation documents, could you clarify which is to be used, or if both, where each is to be used? | RCP is required under pavement, HDPE may be used under areas such as the side walk or sod. |
| Will water be available to contractor personnel via hydrant or otherwise? | Yes; reasonable amount |
| Will This Proposal require a hard copy of the original Bid Bond? | No |
| Will This proposal be submitted via Email or in person? | |
| Will there be a Pre-bid Meeting? If so, What is the date, time, and location? | No |
| When is the RFI Deadline? | 6-Jun-22 |
| Do you have details of the trapezoidal channel and trickle channel? | The trapazodial channels are mostly in place and silted in. The range in width varies, as could be seen when at the walk through. This being a maintenance project, we are correcting past project problems. The 2 foot wide concrete trickle channels locations is shown on attached drawing. |
| Please clarify the Clear & Grub and Construction Staking quantities. Zone A & Zone B provide different units. | During the walk through, some brush was shown which grew along the sides of the old channel. |
| Please clarify the Clear & Grb line item. What specifically is to be cleared & grubbed? | see above |
| Since it is LPTA and an acceptable/unacceptable for the remainder of the proposal would you consider sealed bidding? These volumes with so much detail take a great deal of time to put together for our marketing and technical people. | The government has made a determination to utilize the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable |
(LPTA) source selection procedure in accordance with FAR 15.101-2 and 15.3 as supplemented by the DoD Source Selection Procedures referenced in DFARS 215.300 and the AFFARS Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision.
| After reading all the documents there is no reference to a formal design. In multiple places a Construction package mentions an engineer doing it, calculations etc. but it is due 20 days after NTP. If the construction package is a design there is no way it can be done in only 20 days with surveys and investigations having to be done after award and prior to any design work. Please define what design expectations are. | No Design required. This is a general regrade and clean up of past problems. The channel grades are controlled by existing piping elevations that are being relocated in place. No full site surveys are required. Recent survey of pipe elevations is attached. |
| 180 days is not enough time for normal design submittals of 35%, 65% and 100% to Final, to be drafted, reviewed for 30 days each submittal, plus possible lengthy permit waiting periods. Please consider extending to at least 270 days. | No Design required. |
| Statement of work section 4.11.1 B Site Construction Data: The contractor is responsible for field reconnaissance, surveys, site investigations and testing required to obtain engineering information and data for accomplishment of the contract documents in accordance with the requirements of this statement of work. This statement implies prior to proposal submission we must do all these investigations so there are no surprises after award and we know exactly how much the design will cost and exactly how much material we will need. Normally surveys and other investigations happen right after award/NTP as part of the design, take weeks, and are expensive. With only a week to prepare this proposal there is no time for those surveys and investigations prior to award. There will be many areas where we won’t have exact dimensions when we do our estimate. How will this be handled after award if we find unforeseen issues? | No Design required. |
| Page 57 of Statement of work 6.1.4 Geotechnical/Haz Material Survey Requirements and Responsibilities - Are there any known or suspected contaminated areas within the areas of work? If none are known and some is found it is unreasonable to expect the contractor to pay for removal and disposal per 6.1.4 B “Any contaminated soil discovered a geotechnical survey is the contractors responsibility for removal and disposal of the soil”. This is very open ended and could end up being a huge expense so should we plan on finding contamination and add a contingency cost for it just in case? | No contaminated soil. But if encountered, contractor will notify Contracting Officer. |
| There isn’t much time to put together a proposal with this much requested information in four volumes. Can the proposal due date be extended two weeks? | No |
| Is a Construction Analysis described on page 61 replace a normal design narrative? | No construciton analysis is required. |
| Appendix A on page 4 are zone A and zone B quantities. There wasn’t time during the site visit to measure out every detail to this level, so this description with exact units and quantities are a huge help. If we use these quantities to prepare our cost proposals after award if these quantities turn out to be inaccurate, will we be able to be reimbursed for actual/differing quantities discovered during the design phase? | Notify Contracting Officer if incorrect quantities. Again, no design required for this project. |
| This area of work is loaded with utilities active and likely some abandoned. Are there any base utility drawings to help us during proposal preparation? | We have attached presently available drawings. These are contractor as-builts, so there is no guarantee as to the accruratcy of the plans. The contractor is required to Call the state number and/or utility for locates, and then, either pot hole or use a Vactor to confirm the location. |
| Are there known existing FDEP stormwater permits for the area? | The Fire Station No. 2 at the Dejarnette intersection has a permit. The AFNORTH site has had past permits. |
| When improving drainage, can the overflow flumes (concrete) be removed? | Yes, they become the property of the contractor. |
| In lieu of remove and replace the stormwater pipes under pavement, can they remain in place with new pipe routing? | NO |
| In lieu of the 6x6’ drainage inlet, can a pour-in-place concrete structure be used? | YES, poured in place only. Set FDOT St'd attached. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .