Q__A_Hangar_Door_Project__1.pdf

Answers to Questions #1

Project FTQW 15-1021

Repair Hangar Door (B1335)

11 June, 2015

Q1. Regarding the below section of the specifications: “2.11 ELECTRIC SAFETY EDGE MODIFICATIONS

A. Remove existing pneumatic safety edges from edge of door sill. B. New bottom safety edge is not required.” Can you please confirm why a safety edge / other entrapment protection device has not been specified?

A1. These edges are for typical garage overhead doors.

Q2. Plan Sheet G002 Hazardous Material detail shows areas of “KNOWN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, TYPICAL ALL BAYS, SEE LEAD BASED PAINT REPORT.” I have been unable to locate a lead based paint report in the RFP documents. Please provide the lead based paint report, and advise if lead based paint abatement will be contractor’s responsibility for this project.

A2. Lead based paint report is attached. No LBP is present on any of the structural items

(counterweights/cabinets, operators, etc.) that the project touches. Only LBP present is in yellow paint striping on floor below door to include on stop plates (mentioned in the report). If the contractor sees need to remove paint striping on floor or on stop plates for this project's work (which Government does not anticipate), contractor would need to provide proper abatement of the paint.

Q3. Are any other known hazardous material present in the Hangar 1335 building? Will a hazardous material survey or abatement be necessary for this project?

A3. No other known hazardous materials present. Hazardous materials survey not required

(again, report made available from other inquiry above). Abatement not required w/ the possible exception of yellow paint noted in #1 above.

Q4. Detail 7/A103 appears to show a counter weight on each side of the door. All other details and show counterweights on one side only of all doors. Please confirm each door will be modified to have only one counterweight.

A4. We confirm that each door should be modified to have only one counterweight. Detail

7/A103 is correct but isn’t intended to show final constructed state from this construction effort

- this detail shows the operator and sheave assembly schematic as it currently exists (prior to this construction effort, with two counterweights). Reference detail 1/A202 for operator and sheave assembly schematic that is to be constructed (w/ only one counterweight). Details

7/A103 and 1/A202 are respectively the before and after pictures of this schematic.

Q5. Sheet A-102, Detail 4 and Sheet A-201, Detail 2 call for new doors and hardware. All Doors. Is the intent to replace only the man/doors in the Hangar Overhead Doors, or replace every door in the building?

A5. The intent is to replace only the man doors within the hangar doors, so a total of 8 man doors (one per each hangar door). Other doors throughout the building remain as they are.

Q6. Sheet A-205, Detail 5: Is it the intent not to install insulated glass in the new doors?

A6. We need insulated glass. Follow spec 08 11 13, 2.4A for insulated glass (1 inch insulated glass). We want the best thermal value we can get with in this hangar. Wire glass drawing detail (5/A205) showing 1/4" wire glass is not correct.

Q7. There is a trouble on the fire alarm panel at Building 1335. Will it be fixed before the start of the project?

A7. We can fix / clear trouble prior to project.

Q8. Will the contractor need to re-certify the fire alarm and foam systems when the work is complete?

A8. See specification section 28 31 00 (specifically part 3, 3.1 Installation, B/D/E) for required testing of fire alarm system. There is no requirement to test foam/suppression system as part of this work.

Q9. Alcan Builders is a certified Kingspan Wall Panel installer. Can Kingspan be an approved equal?

A9. We would need to evaluate the panel specs during the submittal process to approve. See

Section 07 42 14 Insulated Metal Wall Panels of the specification for requirements.

Q10. Specification section 08 36 18 1.1 aa. States visual inspection of new welds in the base bid scope of work, Spec Section 05 12 00 3.5 A states that the owner will engage a qualified independent testing and inspecting agency to inspect field welds and high strength bolted connections. Please clarify extent of owner provided inspections and expectation for extent of GC provided field inspections.

A10. We assume you are referring to 08 36 18 Part 1, 1.1A, 1ee which states “Visual inspection of all new welds by certified welding inspector.” Contractor is required to provide these inspections for all welding done on project. Any inspections done by Government are for owner’s purposes only. Contractor is responsible for Quality Control (see specification section 01

40 00) to include welding inspections.

Q11. Is there anywhere on Eielson to dispose of the existing counterweights?

A11. Yes, Eielson has concrete dump locations.

Q12. Part 1.1- A.- 1.- U. States; “Remove hanger door”. If it is determined with closer inspection and evaluation, that the refurbishing and reskinning could be performed in a standing/in-place manner, would this be allowed?

A12. We assume ‘door’ is referring to the tip up canopy. If so, complete removal of entire door is not necessarily required. However, as indicated by architectural narrative, contractor must remove (exterior) skin, as well as inspect for and repair faults. Additionally, pivot point assemblies need to be inspected/replaced. If leaving door in place prevents any of the required contract work to be completed, then doors must be removed to provide the work.

Q13. Same part as above (Part 1.1- A.- 1.- U.) refers to insulation, repair or replace. What type of insulation is in the doors now, i.e. Foam in place, bat. or other?

A13. Refer to JA-1 Architectural Narrative for description of hangar door construction, including insulation.

Q14. Is it the Governments desire to have the bulk of the work completed during the warmer months?

A14. Yes, intent was to have all work completed in warmer months (May-September).

Q15. If the award was given in July 2015 for instance, would the Government want the work to begin with the remainder of warm weather, and then start again in spring of 2016. Or will it be preferred to start and finish in warm weather, 2016.

A15. We could potentially do some work this summer (2015) after award but this has not been coordinated on yet with all base players. Additionally, we would need to have all required submittals submitted and approved prior to construction. Exact timing of construction would be determined after award.

Q16. 01 14 00. If the concrete counter-weights are disposed of off base, does that eliminate for those pieces, all hazardous waste testing requirements that were called for with on base disposal.

A16. We assume you are referring to requirement to fill out the C&D form referenced in 01 14

00, 1.19 Environmental Protection, D and F (note: the C&D form is second attachment [appendix

B] to section 01 14 00). Even if disposed off base, we would need to account for the disposal of this (and all other) material through the receipt of waste tickets/manifests (see 01 14 00, 1.19F item 2). Though filling out the C&D form would not be required, contractor would need to adhere to the chosen disposal location’s policies (likely to include screening similar to the C&D), and provide Eielson copies of all waste disposal tickets and manifests from that disposal location.

Q17. Manual pull stations in Bays 9, 10, & 12 are called out to be relocated. The manual pull station in

Bay 11 is not called out to be relocated. Is this correct?

A17. Drawing E100 should also have a note to relocate a pull station in Bay 11 (reference also detail 3/A204). Contractor should plan to relocate a (one) pull station in each of the 4 bays (on the side of bay where new installation to occur) to support new installation work, for a total of 4 relocated pull stations.

Q18. Demolition drawing E100 Detail 1/E100 shows a heavy duty disconnect to be demolished. Detail

2/E200 does not show a disconnect to be reinstalled. Is this correct? Will one be required?

A18. Code allows the use of the circuit breaker inside the panel to serve as the disconnect, provided that it is within sight of the motor. No new disconnects are required in this installation. Specification section was included by the designer in case the door installer wanted to install a disconnect for their (the installer’s) convenience.

Q19. Will the control panels/motors/etc. be considered to be within the 5 foot Class 1 Division 2 classification as noted in Note 2 on Sheet E100?

A19. No. See JA-3 Electrical Narrative – it states that none of this project’s electrical work is anticipated to project into this classified area.

Q20. Specification Section 08 36 18 ff: Will the interior side of the Hangar doors be painted in one color or will they be 2-toned?

A20. Interior sides of hangar doors should be painted in one color.

Q21. Can the bid date be extended a few days?

A21. The Bid has been extended to 25 June 2015 at 2:00PM Alaska Standard Time. See

Amendment 0003.

Q22. At each of the existing door controller/motor locations, there is a ½” rigid conduit extending up through the concrete floor. If this conduit is not going to be re-used for this project, will it need to capped at the current height of cut flush with the floor and filled in?

A22. Capping it is fine provided that remaining conduit does not interfere with other contractor-installed work (adjust if needed to install other work).