FA524024R0007_RFIs_Responses_04SEP24.pdf

Q&A # Reference Question Government Response

The existing runway extends approximately 8,338 feet from the east end to the road intersection at the west end. To reach the new length of 8,500 feet, can it be assumed that the extension will only occur westward, beyond the existing road?

Yes, existing road cuts across the airfield on the 06R end. The 8500' measurement is from the pavement joint with the overrun on the 06R end to the end of pavement on the 24L end.

Portions of the existing runway are concrete pavement. Does the government have any as-built to share with bidders? Are there any thickened edge sections or reinforcement within the concrete pavement?

No as-builts available. There are no thickened edge or reinforcement as these concrete sections were executed as expeditionary repairs.

Is the new 10-foot-wide shoulder included in the new total width of 150 feet x 8500 ft long? In other words, is the new runway 130 feet wide, with an additional two 10-foot-wide shoulders on either side?

Runway width should be 150' wide with addition 10' shoulders on each side culminating in a 170' wide pavement.

4 Please confirm whether runway edge lighting is required. No airfield lighting is required. This is an expeditionary airfield using Visual Flight Rules (VFR) only.

5 Statement of Work

Per the scope of work item 4.5.C, new pavement elevations must match the existing elevations. Does the government have a topographic survey of the existing runway?

Yes. Survey elevations were included in the 35% design (Attachment 02) provided.

Some sections of the existing runway are over 210 feet wide (concrete pavement). These sections will be partially sawcut and demolished to construct the new runway. Can the remaining sections of the existing concrete runway remain in place, or should they be completely removed?

Existing pavement shall be sawcut and remain in place. Industry standard joint seal shall be used along these areas.

It appears the existing runway has a mono-sloped design. Since the RFP requires matching the existing slope, please confirm that the new runway will not have a crown at the center.

New runway will have a 1.5% slope from the center crown as shown in the details on the 35% design (Attachment 02) provided.

During the site visit, we observed at least two underground utility crossings beneath the runway. Can you confirm if any active underground utilities (such as power, communication, or electrical lines) exist across the existing runway?

The Government is not able to confirm the existence of any active underground utilities. The contractor is responsible for conducting field verification and shall consult with the Government PM or Contracting Officer for further direction.

9 36 CONS We respectfully request a 2-week extension of the deadline to September 17, 2024. The Government does not intend to extend the proposal due date for this solicitation (FA524024R0007)

FA524024R0007

SAKW 23-5001 Repair Thunder Landing Zone (LZ)

Questions & Answers (Q&A)

10 SOW & 35%

Design

Please reference Attachment 1-Statement of Work. Please provide any existing geotech site investigation reports for the existing runway. From the site visit it appeared that there were core holes in the pavement from a previous site investigation. If no data is available, please provide existing pavement sections for proposers to use as the basis of estimate for demolition and removal of the existing runway as noted in section 4.4-Demolition/Removal Works.

The Government does not have any existing Geotechnical data to provide. The desired pavement sections' dimensions can be found in both the provided Statement of Work and 35% Design. The Statement of Work dictates a full depth repair.

Please reference Attachment 1-Statement or Work. Section 4.4- Demolition/Removal Works paragraph e) states that MEC clearance may be required by the 36th Civil Engineer Squadron. Given that the entire NW Field area is designated “red” or “high likelihood” for MEC in the JRM ESS how should proposers prepare their estimates, should MEC be excluded from proposals and if required proposers will be issued a change order? Is a depth for known prior clearance and construction activity available to bidders as basis of estimate as the depth to start MEC clearance? Please clarify.

The 36 CES requires conducting MEC for all projects. The government currently does not have information regarding the depths for prior clearances and construction activity as requested.

Please reference Attachment 1-Statement or Work. Section 4.4- Demolition/Removal Works paragraph c) states that the Contractor shall remove heavy vegetation and other unsuitable materials that are encroaching on the shoulders. To what limits outside the proposed new runway shoulders should vegetation be cleared? Proposers could assume different limits and quantities without clarification. Please provide a basis of estimate for all Proposers to use in their estimates.

Only minor vegetation clearance is required for this project. This would include any/all vegetation (i.e.

grass and weed) that have penetrated the surface of the existing pavement.

13 SOW & 35%

Design

Please reference Attachment 1-Statement of Work. Section 4.1-“Design” indicates that the Contractor shall provide a 100% final design. It goes on to discuss the use of the runway and expected criteria for the design. Further down in this document in section 4.5-“Construction and Restoration Work” AF provides prescriptive pavement section criteria for runway and shoulder pavements and basecourse. Should the criteria found in section 4.5 serve as the basis of estimate for all proposers? Has the Government confirmed that the criteria provided in section 4.5 meet the requirements of section 4.1 ?

The criteria in Section 4.5 and the provided 35% Design shall serve as the basis for all design work.

Refer to attachment 1 and 2.

14 Can we reuse the existing base course? The Contractor shall provide new base course.

15 Is Archaeological survey required? An archaeological survey is not required within the existing, already-disturbed footprint.

Thunder LZ is environmentally cleared for pavement repair work.

16 Is US Flag vessel required when importing base course from outside Guam? Yes, IAW 252.247-7023 Transportation of Supplies by Sea. Refer to FA524024R0007 Solicitation Amendment 02 dated 20 August 2024 as incorporated.

36 CONS

FAR 52.225-1 Due to the shortage of base course in Guam, can we import base course from other countries?

This is allowed, so long as:

1. The Buy American Act requirements are met;

2. The material is coming from an approved country, or country covered under the trade agreement; and

3. That the chemical composition of the aggregate is not compromised and not sourced from an area where environmental concerns are present.

18 Please provide copy of sign in sheet during the pre-bid conference. The Government does not intend on disclosing or sharing information regarding the pre-proposal site visit attendee listing.

19 Refer to Section M B(1)

Given that this is a HUBZone set-aside for small businesses, could the period of past performance be extended from 5 to 7 years?

The Government does not intend on altering or extending the recent past performance information period. The period of past performance information shall remain IAW Section M B(1) of the solicitation (5 years).

Refer to

Solicitation Section L

Please clarify which specific parts of the Joint Venture (JV) documentation need to be submitted with the proposal.

Refer to Section L of the Solicitation (FA524024R0007) for instructions regarding submission requirements of JV information.

21 36 CONS Does the government intend on holding an additional pre-proposal site visit for this requirement? The government does not intend to conduct another pre-proposal site visit at this time.

22 36 CONS Is this solicitation (FA524024R0007 SAKW 23-5001Repair Thunder Landing Zone (LZ)) part of a MACC or a separate solicitation?

Solicitation ID FA524024R0007 is a separate solicitation as a stand-alone contract and not part of a

MACC.

Subject: Truck Inspection For hot-mix asphalt (HMA) delivery, will the truck inspections be conducted at the NWF gate or redirected at the ACE gate vehicle inspection post at AAFB?

Truck inspections shall be conducted at the main Andersen Vehicle Inspection gate before proceeding to North West Field (NWF).

Reference: ATT_2_SAKW_23_5001_35 % Design_Drawing Sheet G-002 General Note for Asphalt Subject: Item 1 Road Construction and Item 6 reference to UFGS 32 12.15.13 In the general notes for Asphalt Pavement, item 1 appears to conflict with item

6. Item 1 refers to “Road Construction” specification while item 6 references UFGS 32 12.15.13. We suggest substituting “Road Construction” to “asphalt paving for airfields.”

Item 6, which references UFGS 32 12.15.13 "Asphalt Paving for Airfields", shall substitute Item 1 "Road Construction".

Reference: ATT_2_SAKW_23_5001_35 % Design_Drawing Sheet G-002 General Note for Asphalt Subject: Compaction or Density Requirement In the general notes for Asphalt Pavement, compaction or density requirement in item 8 has a very tight range of 94-96%. UFGS 32 12.15.13 allows in-place densities for both the mat and joint between 92-97% and 90.5-92.5%, respectively. Do you allow these ranges for relative compaction of HMA?

***UPDATE***

The Contractor shall follow the general notes for Asphalt Pavement, which requires 94-96% compaction.

Note: Disregard this response and refer to the RFI response on Line Item # 28 below for the amended response

Reference: Standard Form 1442, item 11 Subject: Performance Period The project Performance Period states 550CD Design and Construction. We think that performance period is not sufficient, and we request to Government to adjust to 640CD this is to consider all the pre-construction design requirements for the project that includes Geotechnical exploration and survey prior to come-up with the design. Also, the construction itself will take around 16-18 months excluding the design.

The period of performance for this subject requirement (FA524024R0007) has changed from 550 calendar days to 640 calendar days for project completion. Refer to Attachment 01 Statement of Work (SOW) dated 23 August 2024 Revised and amended SF 1442 and SF30.

Requirement: RFI Response, Item 11 Subject: MEC Clearance For the Purpose and uniformity of bid, can the bidder assume 18in depth prior to MEC clearance work

The Contractor shall assume 18in of depth before proceeding with any MEC clearance work.

Refer to UFGS

32 12.15.13 (Table 11)

We would like to seek reconsideration of the government response to Q & A #25. Drawing from our experience in asphalt paving, we find that achieving a very tight range of 94-96% relative compaction is practically unfeasible.

To facilitate our decision-making and maintain compliance with specification and industry standards, we would appreciate your guidance on the following:

1. Confirmation of the allowable density range for asphalt pavement as per UFGS 32 12.15.13 Table 1 with its corresponding pay factor?

2. Clarification of potential penalties or consequences should the achieved density fall outside the specified compaction range of 94-96%?

***UPDATE***

The contractor shall follow the UFGS 32 12.15.13 standard of 92% to 96% relative (Mat Density) compaction. Refer to UFGS 32 12.15.13 (Table 11)

On other airfield paving projects runways sawcut grooving is applied to the runway pavement surface. Please confirm that runway sawcut grooving is not required as part of this project.

Per the FAA AC 150/5320-12C, "Measurement, Construction, and Maintenance of Skid-Resistant Airport Pavement Surfaces", runway sawcut grooving is required.

*** NO FURTHER ENTRIES ***

Q&A for SAM