Attachment 3 - RFI Responses (20210507).pdf

Solicitation FA521521R0007

REPLACE VEHICLE BARRIERS

KAENA POINT SATELLITE TRACKING STATION

RFI Responses – 7 May 2021

1. Please confirm a single laydown yard will be provided for the duration of the project and identify location.

ANSWER: We will provide a laydown yard throughout the project. The laydown yard may change, this depends on Contractor needs, work location and as approved by the CE.

Contractors can submit a request for multiple laydown areas that can be used during various phases of the work/duration of the project.

2. Existing trees and root systems will be an obstruction during construction activities.

Please provide contractor requirements for disturbing trees. For example; can trees obstructing construction activities be removed entirely? Will a certified arborist be required for tree trimming?

ANSWER: See paragraph 2.10 of the revised SOW.

3. In regard to vehicle barrier (bldg. 1):

a. Please clarify traffic control requirements. While work on the inbound lane is being performed, will the KTR be responsible to provide flaggers to control incoming and outgoing traffic or will signage satisfy traffic control requirements?

ANSWER: During the work, the contractor will be allowed to completely close the inbound lane. Traffic will be routed through the outbound lane. Contractor shall provide adequate signage to protect workers and direct incoming personnel to the outbound lane. Flagger should be available to deconflict vehicles entering/exiting through the outbound lane. After work hours, the inbound lane shall be restored to allow normal traffic (if/when possible since there will be no flagger after hours).

b. Please provide photos of existing controls in BLDG. 1 and provide make and model.

Entry was not allowed during initial site visit.

ANSWER: See attached photos. The existing controls for the barrier at Bldg. 1 was demolished.

c. Please provide photos of existing electrical panels that power barriers.

ANSWER: See attached photos.

d. Please confirm that the steel plate barrier will be replace with an automatic, crash rated (ASTM F2656, C40 minimum) Arm Barrier and not a steel plate barrier.

ANSWER: See paragraphs 2.4 and 4.1 of the revised SOW.

e. Once existing steel plate barrier is removed, please clarify how the KTR is to restore the site?

i. Will amended soil be required to back fill?

ii. Base course/ compaction requirements?

iii. Rebar/ spacing requirements

iv. concrete mix design requirements?

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.1. of the revised SOW.

4. In regard to site #2 on Road C:

a. Please confirm there are not existing controls in Bldg. 2 and that new wired remote controls will be required.

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.2. of the revised SOW.

b. There is a high possibility that the existing power supply is not sufficient to power new crash rated arm barrier specified. For bidding purposes, is the KTR to assume the existing power is sufficient or is the KTR to assume new power wiring is to be provided? Please note that trenching will already be required in order to provide new wired remote controls in BLDG

2.

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.2 of the revised SOW.

c. Please provide photos of electrical panels and panel directory. Panels were locked and inaccessible during site visit.

5. In regard to the Drop Arm barrier (Back Entry Point, Site 3):

a. KTR is to remove the delta barriers in its entirety and “restore the site”. For bidding purposes, please clarify to what extend KTR is to restore the site. Will existing concrete pads need to be removed?

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.3. of the revised SOW.

6. In regard to Manual Swing Arm (to Bldg. 39010, site 4):

a. For bidding purposes, please provide a quantity of bollards and spacing requirements.

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.4. of the revised SOW.

7. Can Contractor fill existing barrier after mechanical devices have been demolished and proper cleaning/degreasing of area to bring back up to grade? Or will the sub grade structure need to be removed as well.

ANSWER: Assuming this question is referencing the removal of existing hydraulic barriers, see paragraph 4.3. of the revised SOW.

8. Can the project duration of 180days be increase to 240 days to consider COVID related delays on manufacturers of materials and equipment.

ANSWER: See paragraph 7.4 of the revised SOW.

9. Please confirm no hazardous removal or soil contamination & disposal anticipated or its not in scope for this solicitation.

ANSWER: KPSTS has no records indicating contamination at these sites from current equipment or previous actions. No soil contamination work is required.

10. At Building 1, it appears that there is currently only a plate type wedge barrier in the inbound lane, with no ability to positively deny access through the outbound lane. Does the Government intend for this scope of work to provide two (2) wedge barriers and passive barrier between the wedge barriers to deny access through either lane?

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.1. of the revised SOW.

11. The solicitation makes reference in the project objectives to bring the physical security of the station at these locations up to DoD standards, but then specifies a minimum ASTM F2656 C40 minimum crash rating for several of the new barriers. DoD standards require ASM F2656 M50 rated active vehicle barriers – a much higher standard than C40. Please confirm that C40 is not acceptable and that any barriers provided under this contract must be listed on the DoD Approved Anti‐Ram

Vehicle Barrier List.

ANSWER: ASTM references provided for each barrier identified in the SOW is correct. M50 barriers will be installed at site 3 (and already exists on Road A at Bldg. 2 which are the two primary entry ways to the installation/station). All other barriers are not considered primary entry control barriers and can be C40 rated.

12. Is the contractor required to provide the necessary signs, signals, pavement markings, and controls to have the new active vehicle barrier systems meet an approved SDDCTEA safety regime?

ANSWER: See paragraph 2.5 of the revised SOW.

13. Please confirm that the bollards (or other passive barrier) required at each location must only be sufficient to tie the active vehicle barriers to terrain within 50’ of the roadway that presents an obstruction to bypassing the vehicle barriers.

ANSWER: Correct. See paragraph 2.4, 4.1.4, 4.2.4, 4.3.4, and 4.4.3. of the revised SOW.

14. Due to travel limitations from the ongoing COVID‐19 pandemic, we were unable to attend the pre‐bid site visit, but believe we can provide a responsible bid with some additional information regarding the location of each work site.

a. Please confirm that the Building 1 location is shown below, and indicate where the approximate desired location for the new barrier(s):

b. Please confirm that the Back Entry Point, site 3 location is shown below, and indicate where the existing barrier is located and where the new barrier is to be installed:

ANSWER: See attached photos

c. Please confirm that the Building 2, road C barrier location is shown below:

ANSWER: There is no work to perform at this building. See attached photos

d. Please confirm that the Building 39010, site 4 location is shown below, and indicate where the approximate barrier location is to be:

ANSWER: No, there is no work to perform near this building. See attached photos.

15. What voltage and what size circuit for the barrier power is currently available at:

e. Building 1: 240V, 2 pole, 20A

f. Building 2: 120V, 1 pole, 20A

g. Building 23 19: 240V, 2 pole, 20A

ANSWER: No barriers receive power from Bldg. 23. The back entry point, site 3, drop arm barrier receives power from Bldg. 19.

16. The SOW for Building 39010, site 4 indicates that bollards will be required. Please confirm if this means that a crash rated passive vehicle barrier (listed on the DoD Approved Anti‐Ram Vehicle Barrier List) must be installed to tie‐in the new swing arm barrier to adjacent terrain or security fencing.

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.4.3 of the revised SOW.

17. Is this contract intended to be a design‐build contract or construction contract?

ANSWER: This contract is a construction contract. There is no requirement for engineering design and the new barriers should be able to be installed using shop drawings from the barrier manufacturer and existing design/installation standards.

18. Please confirm whether there is a simply a preference for electrically operated active vehicle barrier systems or if this is a requirement (hydraulic is not acceptable).

ANSWER: The SOW does not specify a electric or hydraulic barrier type, but allows the contractor to propose a barrier system that meets our requirements and will work with our unique site conditions.

19. Is there currently a proximity card reader mounted on a pedestal at the Back Entry Point, site 3 that can be relocated to meet the SOW requirement?

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.3 of the revised SOW.

20. Are there any limitations on the type of construction equipment allowed on the site?

ANSWER: No limitation

21. Do all workers have to be U.S. Citizens or are Permanent Legal Residents authorized to work in the U.S. allowed?

ANSWER: See paragraph 6 of the revised SOW.

22. Please clarify gates requested, i.e. gate 1 to be similar to gate 2 at intersection of C St and B St.

ANSWER: See paragraph 2.4 of the revised SOW.

23. Please specify passive bollard requirements per each gate.

ANSWER: See paragraph 2.4, 4.1.4, 4.2.4, 4.3.4, and 4.4.3. of the revised SOW.

24. Please provide as‐builts of all areas due to existing utilities in the area water, sewer, etc.

ANSWER: See attachments.

25. 4.1 ‐ Gate 1 verify power from Bldg 4 and controls to Bldg 1. Please provide one line diagram or power at Bldg 4 for interoperability between existing and new.

ANSWER: See RFI No. 15 response. Power and control conduits are still in‐place. There are no as‐builts for this barrier.

26. 4.1 ‐ Gate 1 please specify desired automatic crash rated barrier.

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.1 of the revised SOW.

27. 4.1 ‐ Please provide wiring diagram/photos of existing control panel for interoperability between existing and new.

ANSWER: See attachments.

28. 4.1 ‐ Will roadway need to be patched or leave equipment in place and place new control arm?

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.1. of the revised SOW.

29. 4.2 – Electrical/Comm hand holes from new gate to guard shack to be traffic rated H20 with tamper resistant head/bolts?

ANSWER: See paragraph 2.11 of the revised SOW.

30. 4.2 – Is there enough electrical capacity for a new arm at the guard shack?

ANSWER: See paragraph 4.1, 4.2., and attached photos of the panels. Electrical capacity would depend on the type of barrier that proposed/selected for each location.

31. 4.3 – SOW says to restore site but site visit stated concrete pads and various equipment can be abandoned in place. Please specify via photos what can and cannot be abandoned.

ANSWER: See applicable paragraphs in the revised SOW for reach site that requires demolition of existing equipment.

32. At various locations will slow release root barrier need to be installed?

ANSWER: See paragraph 2.10 of the revised SOW. It is assumed that this type of root barrier is classified as a herbicide.

33. Is there a hazardous material inventory for the existing barricades to be removed/replaced?

ANSWER: Existing barriers at site 1 and 2 have electrical operators (no hydraulic fluid). Barrier at site 3 used hydraulic fluid. See paragraph 4.3.2 of the revised SOW. The SDS for the hydraulic fluid that is currently being used in the system can be provided if needed.