Honor Guard Facility RFI Responses.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 19 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Construct Honor Guard Facility, Tyndall AFB, FL
- Solicitation number
- FA481924R0014
About this file
This document is a Request for Information (RFI) related to the Construct Honor Guard Facility, Tyndall AFB, FL solicitation (Solicitation Number FA481924R0014).
The RFI contains responses to 36 questions from potential offerors regarding the project requirements, design constraints, and solicitation terms. Key details include: the government's requirements for the roof design, resume requirements, proposal submission instructions, the period of performance, stormwater permitting, HVAC system specifications, fire alarm/mass notification system requirements, and pricing for the site utilities. Several clarifications are provided, such as allowing insulated metal panels, not requiring a sprinkler system, and confirming the need for a permanent roof access ladder and fall protection. The solicitation has a proposal due date of July 31, 2024, which has been extended to August 13, 2024 based on the RFI responses. The project is being procured by the Department of the Air Force Air Combat Command.
View the file
Other files
Show all 33
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
| Request for Information - Honor Guard Facility |
| FA481924R0014 |
| # | Information Requested | Response | Notes | |
| 1 | Page 21 of Appendix A Description of Work, under section 8.0 Structural C. ROOF, sates | |||
| that the roof is to be constructed with two monoslope standing seam roofs and one broken gable as illustrated in the concept drawings. On this small building, would the base consider a more simple and traditional roof to save costs? | "As per the Tyndall IFS and the RFP documents the design of the massing of the building is complete. |
The roof shall be built as it is drawn in the RFP document. " -JMondo
| 2 | Section L, Vol 1, Tab 4 asks for Section L (only pages that require offeror responses). | |
| There does not appear to be anything in section that the Contractor needs to mark. Does the gov want a copy of Section L given back to them in the Contractor Proposals, or can this requirement be removed from the proposal preparation Instructions? | Contract Provisions (Standard Form 1442) - has provisions and clauses that require Contractor fill-ins.Contractors only to provide the pages of the 1442 that require their information. | |
| 3 | Section L, Vol 2, Tab 3 asks for 3 past projects and Vol 3, Tab 1 also asks for 3 past |
projects. a. Should both of these tabs be consolidated under Vol 3, tab 1 only?
b. IF the base would like past performance for both Vol 2 and Vol 3, as Section L is currently written, can these be the same projects, or is the base asking for 6 separate projects as past performance?
| VOLUME II - TECHNICAL (FACTOR 1): TAB #3 (Subfactor 3) deals with experience and has specific instructions to provide evidence, some prime contractor, with the specific type of work related to the project. "Experience in one story federal building projects.(a) Offerors shall submit three (3) building projects showing construction experiencewith at least two projects that constructed a new facility from the ground up as the prime contractor. VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE (FACTOR 2) deal with your past performance of projects of this size and magnatude (a) Offerors shall provide past performance information in the form of Past Performance Information Sheets (Attachment 26) or Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System for each of the three contracts for the building projects represented in Vol II Tab 03. | ||
| 4 | Are any details regarding the Designer of Record required with proposals? If so, what information should be included with proposals? Where should this information be included (Volume 1, 2, etc)? | RFP mentions no rquirement to identify Designer of Record in the submitted proposals. |
| 5 | Section L & M Document, Page 2 - Please confirm that proposals may be submitted via email AND DoD SAFE. | Government is not responsible for late or non-delivered proposals. Contractors reqponsibility provide the proposal before the cuttoff time othe prop;osal due date RFP allows for email or DOD safe. DOD safe links must be requested no later than 4 hours before due date. |
| 6 | Section L & M Document, Page 7 - Please confirm that the only resumes required with this proposal are of the CQC person and not the Project Manager, Superintendent, and SSHO. For each resume required, what are the minimum resume requirements (years of experience, certifications, etc)? | L&M Technical requirement relates to the coQuality Control ,management wiresume and appointment letRFP does not as for resumes of superintendent or other personnel. |
| 7 | The bid is due on 7/31 which is only 12 days from today. We have two concerns in producing a technical proposal in this time frame: |
| I. | We will not be able to fully complete our proposal without these RFI questions answered. Even if they are answered in a week, that only leaves 5 days to complete our proposal. |
| II. | This being a design-build solicitation with extremely limited bridging documents, our Designer of Record must put together a preliminary design before the scope of work can be properly developed and subcontractors solicited. |
| Therefore, we request that the bid be moved to 2 weeks after the RFI Questions have been answered. | Prosal Due date will be extended to August 13, 2024 same time as currently due. | ||
| 8 | The GCEC portion to be provided for this project is large. Can unit rates for individual utilities or a lump sum budget be provided for their work? | For proposal purposes CLIN 006 is provided with a "not to Exceed" amount of $100,000.00. see CLIN description on Page 4 of the 1442. | |
| 9 | The Period of Performance (POP) is not clear. The Solicitation states performance to begin within 270 days and complete 365 days after (635 total days). From this it is unclear if the 270 days is considered the design prior to construction or not. The Appendix B – Additional Requirements puts POP at 544 days then elsewhere lays out a calendar of 264 days for design, 245 days for construction and 35 days for close out (534 days). The length of design is contingent on the amount of review time required by the government. The 264-day design schedule given Appendix B, is based on a review times of 14 days for the 35%, 65% & 100% Designs each. The Description of Work states Design Review times to be allowed at 30 days. Experience says that reviews commonly take greater than 30 days to be completed. Using 30-day design review time and allowing more time to review the final 100% drawings ready to be Issued for Construction, we believe a reasonable design schedule should be 340 days. This assumes the Environmental Permit can be achieved in 60 days – low assumption as FDEP has 30 days to check for errors & omissions and 60 days for their review. If Wetland Mitigation is required, the time will greatly increase. Construction at 365 is a reasonable assumption. We then recommend the POP to be 705 days. | POP is 264 days for design, 245 days for construction and 35 days for close out (534 days). | |
| 10 | The Wetlands Limits shown on the Conceptual Drawings Site Plan is shown to be very close to the parking area. Assuming this drawing is near to scale shown, the parking lot shown is too small. If in fact the Wetlands are required to be mitigated the cost and time of the project is greatly increased. Can you provide the as-built site plan for B1701 and add the Wetland Limits to the to the HG Topo Area Rev A plan or are we to assume that there will be Wetland Mitigation and Permitting required? | “We do not have As-Builts on record. Do not change the size of the parking lot, the RFP drawings are correct.” -JMondo 7/22/24 |
11 This project has limited landscaping to be required. Is a Licensed Landscape Architect required for this project?
“Yes.” -JMondo 7/22/24
| 12 | 2. 3.1 (H) states, Basins must have 3-inch weep holes cast into the walls. The exterior of the weep holes must receive a 1/4-inch wire mesh with a 12-inch width belt of crushed rock, ASTM 357.” Weepholes and sumps have been a continued problem in Northwest Florida resulting in structures floating and failing. Can you please clarify where you would like to see the weepholes specifically. | Storm water designwill dictate wherthe weepholes would be located. |
| 13 | 3.1 (I) states, that the contractor much submit an 813 for the project site for the stormwater and facility location. Typically, an 813 is the upfront environmental evaluation that the base provides for the project site. Is the intent for the contractor to provide an Environmental Assessment for Base Environmental to review? Additionally, it the intent for the Environmental Resource Permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to be submitted to Base Environmental and CE for review? | 813 was provided for this project as attachment 6, it would be part of the srorm water plan submission required as part of the project. In answer to the second question: Yes, the contractor must submit the ERP, CGP and SWPPP to the government POC in charge of the project to review." E.Wallace 7/22/24 |
| 14 | Attachment 2 - Additional Requirements 9.1 Commissioning Agent states "Follow the UFGS sections on Commissioning. The CxA must be a certified, experienced, proficient third-party professional." |
| If the Commissioning Agent is an employee of the Mechanical Engineer, but is not part of the design team are they considered a "Third-Party"? | Negative. The employee has a contractual obligation with the Mechanical Engineer. In either scenario the employee and/or the Mechanical Engineer has a contractual relationship with the Designer of Record (DOR), "they" are not considered Third Party. | ||
| 15 | In Attachment 2, the schedule allows for 60 days for the Stormwater Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) reviews on the base level. The FDEP usually takes an additional 30 days for their initial review and then another 15-30 days for their final review. The schedule does not address the outside permitting requirements. This permit requires the base commander’s signature and typically, the commander will not sign the permit until after the 100% design documents have been issued. Please confirm the schedule and permitting timelines. | RFP schedule is confirmed. Contractor responsible for permits, Government has no say or control over outside permitting. | |
| 16 | The RFQ states that, “The site storm drainage system must be designed for treatment of volume of storm water as specified in the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT APPLICANT'S HANDBOOK VOLUME II to retain runoff volume from the 25-year, 24-hour storm event and in accordance with requirements of the Technical Guidance on Implementing the Storm water Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act. The ERP Handbook requires the treatment volume to be retained, ½” of runoff across the site, or 1” of rainfall, whichever is greater. The Technical Guidance on Implementing the Storm water Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act requires attenuation of the 25-year, 24-hour storm event. Please clarify that this is the intent. | "I would suggest you read the front of the following study, Tyndall 100 Percent Drainage Study Report. It will answer questions as they relate to Tyndall. I have known this for many years - one of the best. Just read the bases of the study. The location of the study and worth of adjacent site will great influence on level of detail. Most of the area here is done on a 10 year storm. High level assets create more detail. There can be a big difference between the 1/2" runoff and 1" rainfall. Go on the FDEP site - Drainage Design Guide- Chapter 9 Stormwater Management Facility" -B.Hinton 7/18/24 | |
| 17 | Appendix A, 9.0 states an option to use insulated metal panels for exterior wall cladding. |
| RFI: Is it acceptable to use either PEMB vinyl coated batt insulation or rigid insulation under non-insulated metal wall panels as long as air barrier requirements are met? | "Yes."-JMondo 7/22/24 | ||
| 18 | Are both trap guards and trap primers required for each floor drain? | Trap primers are preferred due to sandy environment. -C/O J.Grable 7/24/24 | |
| 19 | Are separate mini-splits required for the communication room, the electrical room and the mechanical room per 11.0 K. 1. & 11.0 K. 2.? | "Mini-split required for Comm., Electrical, and Mech. are to be conditioned off main system. If not |
possible Mech. & Elec. are to H&V only. Locate fire alarm in conditioned space." -C/O J.Grable 7/24/24
| 20 | Are single duct air terminal units acceptable, or are fan power VAV boxes required? | "No Fan powered." C/O J.Grable 7/24/24 |
| 21 | Can roof line be a simple gable or hip roof or is this massing indicated on the 3D |
drawings of the building a hard project requirement? We are concerned with the
| constructibility and weather-tightness detailing with this roof geometry. | "No. Follow the RFP Drawings as drawn." JMondo 7/22/24 | ||
| 22 | Conceptual floor plan appears to indicate a shower stall, is this shower stall required to meet ABA? | "Yes." JMondo 7/22/24 | |
| 23 | Due to cost concerns, can 3rd party sustainability verification requirements be waived for this project? | "No."-JMondo 7/22/24 | |
| 24 | Due to cost concerns, can BIM requirements be waived for this project? | "No."-JMondo 7/22/24 | |
| 25 | If the outside air requirement is less than 750 CFM, do they still want a DOAS? | "DOAS is preferred for all systems." -C/O J.Grable 7/24/24 | |
| 26 | Is the HVAC system required to be VAV, or can a single zone unit be used? | "If DX, No VAV. Watch for mold growth in shoulder months. (DOAS Requirements)" C/O J.Grable |
7/24/24 27 Mention is made that new systems at Tyndall must be VAV.
RFI: Must the system be a chilled water cooling hot water heating VAV system, or is DX
| acceptable for this size building? | "Less than 20 ton can be DX. Approximately 14T for this building. Heat pumps are okay." C/O J.Grable 7/24/24 | ||
| 28 | Must hot water be used for heating? | "Heat pumps are acceptable. DOAS Requirements."-C/O J.Grable 7/24/24 | |
| 29 | Please confirm there are sound rating requirements for walls, partitions, ceiling/roof, | ||
| doors or windows for this project. | "Yes. Refer to the applicable UFC's." -JMondo 7/22/24 | ||
| 30 | Please provide a room criteria sheet for all required interior spaces so all offerors are | ||
| proposing the same quantity and quality of interior finish materials. | "Room criteria sheets are possibly in the UFC or Catcode requirements. Read the applicable codes |
and standards for this building type." -JMondo 7/22/24 31 RFP Section 16.2A states "The new fire alarm system must include the initiation detectors for the sprinkler system. Ultra-Sensitive sensors must be installed in the Data Center, Test Area, and similar priority areas." RFP section 16.2B states no sprinkler system is required and the conceptual floor plan drawings show no areas of similar priority of those mentioned in section 16.2A.
RFI: Please confirm the intent of no sprinkler system and no ultra-sensitive sensors. "No Sprinklers.
Neither a fire sprinkler nor fire alarm system are required.
A mass notification system is required if the facility will be routinely occupied by 11 or more personnel. UFC 4-010-01 recommends MNS even when not required. My recommendation is to install a combination fire alarm/mass notification system if a mass notification system is required. (Must be Siemens.) The fire alarm/mass notification system control panel and supplemental control panels are required to be installed in an environmentally conditioned space. If not installed at the main entrance, provide a fire alarm annunciator panel at the main entrance. Please ensure a fire hydrant is located within 350’ of the farthest corner of the facility IAW UFC 3-600-01 (Minimum 1500 GPM). If not, please add to the project scope. Please provide a Knox box at the main entrance."
-M.Newbury 7/23/24 32 Section L, 4.1 VOLUME I – EXECUTED CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, TAB #1 Executive Summary states: "...and a summary of the key points from the offeror's Price and Past Performance volumes."
| RFI: What sort of key points from these volumes is the Gov't looking for? Do we put the price from the Price Volume? Do we list the Past performance projects? Please clarify this statement. | Government does not dictate content. This is your summary of the submitted package. | |
| 33 | The SOW mentions a 2-1/2” water line required to the site. It appears the building will not |
need a water line that large.
RFI: Do we run an oversized line into the mechanical room for the building? "GCEC will provide site utility water to 5' outside building. Building contractor shall tie in with water pipe sized for building." -C/O J.Grable 7/24/24 34 Will a permanent roof access ladder be required for this project? "Yes."
-JMondo 7/22/24 35 Will permanent roof fall protection be required for this project? "Yes."
-JMondo 7/22/24
| 36 | In the site plan drawing provided an approximate "Wetland limits" can be seen delineated on the north side of the site. Was a 25-ft | |
| setback incorporated into this approximation? | "Yes." |
-JMondo 7/22/24
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .