RFI-002_Summary.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

PACIFIC AIR FORCES

12 July 2016

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL INTERESTED CONTRACTORS

FROM: 18CONS/LGCC

UNIT 5199

APO AP 96368-5199

SUBJECT: Request for Information (RFI) for Solicitation Number FA5270-16-R-0018, Project No.

LXEZ 16-4313, Install Radon Mitigation, NON-GOH (91 UN), Kadena, Okinawa, Japan

1. The following questions were asked to the 18th Contracting Squadron by interested contractors:

Q1 – Per amendment 02, there are 33 single story units and 58 two story units, for a total of 91 SSD units to be installed. Please define a “Unit”? Is a “Unit” a single family home within a multiplex building, or is a “Unit” a complete multiplex building?

A1 – “Unit” is a single family home within a multiple building.

Q2 – Per government response #9, dated 05Jul16, government states that “additional mitigation systems are not required”. Is contractor to understand that once the SSD system is installed on 1 unit, that if the radon levels are not reduced to below acceptable levels, that this is still acceptable to the government since government is directing only 1 SSD per unit and no more?

A2 – The design complete by certified engineer who has a NRPP to reduce radon level. The government is accept one SSD per unit.

Q3 – Contractor is to install SSD system at a unit, based on unit to be identified by the government after award and based on government provided radon sampling data, with contractor not responsible for any testing. Confirm Design is to be based solely on government post-award provided radon data?

A3 – Design to be based on the government provided radon sampling data.

Q4 - Contractor is to install SSD system at a unit, based on unit to be identified by the government after award and based on government provided radon sampling data, with contractor not responsible for any testing. Does the information to be provided by the government include the location in the “Unit” where the radon sampling data was collected?

A4 – Yes. The information to be provided by the government include the location where the radon sampling data was collected.

Q5 - Contractor is to install SSD system at a unit, based on unit to be identified by the government after award and based on government provided radon sampling data, with contractor not responsible for any testing. During the site visit, government advised that the new SSD systems was to be installed by the contractor “under the largest room in the unit”. Please confirm that this is the correct understanding and direction to be followed?

A5 – The government recommend to install SSD system for living room.

Q6 – Statement of Work 3.10 requires 30 days advance notice to Contracting Officer before starting on-site work, then after CO approval, allow another 14 days advance notification to Housing Office and Housing occupants before starting on-site work. These time frames do not seem to have been considered as part of the Performance Time detailed in SOW 2.4 Performance Time. Will this be corrected?

A6 – No.

Q7 – Given that 1 ACM test and 2 LBP tests are required per SOW 4.6 on each of 24 units and these sampling and testing results are required to be incorporated into the design, and coordination with housing of 14 days advanced notice is needed for any work, the time frame of 46 days for 95% design is not sufficient. Upon receipt of Design NTP, 14 days for housing notification, 5 days for sampling and testing of 24 units, 3 weeks for laboratory analysis, followed by incorporation into design, a minimum of 30 and or a maximum of 40 days should be considered for this first design phase. Since this requirement is going straight to 95% design, a minimum or 75 days should be considered for 95% design phase. Will this be corrected?

A7 – Yes. Change to 60 days.

Q8 – Statement of Work, paragragh 1.2, states that this basically this requirement is “based on pre-testing results”. Please define what is meant by “pre-testing”?

A8 - Pre-testing result mean "test result by government". Add “by government” after pretesting result.

Q9 – Statement of Work, paragragh 1.2, states that this basically this requirement is “based on pre-testing results”. This would imply that additional testing is required. Is there additional radon testing required as part of this SOW?

A9 – Additional pre-testing is not required as part of this SOW.

Q10 – Given the limited information being provided by the government regarding the specific “Units” requiring SSD systems, several questions related to “Unit” are developed:

Q10a – Do any of the 91 units to receive a SSD system have a sub-first floor pipe chase?

A10a – Yes, some units have the sub-first floor pipe chase. Any other units have no pipe chase (crawl space).

Q10b – Are any of the 91 units to receive a SSD systems located between 2 other units, that is if a unit is defined as one housing unit within one multiplex?

A10b – Yes.

Q10c – Absent a design and with only the “pre-testing results”, has the government determined that only a SSD system is sufficient and other mitigation systems such as “interior punch system” or “ adding a SAM system to create positive interior pressure” is not needed?

A10c - ASD and SSD are required as per SOW.

Q11 – Statement of Work, Paragraph 1.1 states to “conduct a pre-installation inspection, gather relevant site data, and review existing drawings and radon sampling data. Determine size, location, and configuration of mitigation system to achieve radon reduction goals of less than 4.0 picocuries per liter for each housing unit”, yet government states to install 1 SSD per unit. It is possible one SSD will not be effective given the unit foundation design, given grade beams, etc, which it appears has not been considered by the government. Given the General Scope paragraph 1.1, it is possible the extent of the government requirement may not be realized and that Diagnostics and system design must be done first.

Without foundation drawings, the only way to know what the vacuum field extension is going to be for each type of unit is to do proper diagnostics. With the POTENTIAL of grade beams in the foundation and little to no aggregate, it is POSSIBLE that a larger unit could take more than one system. Can government provide clear direction and more defined Statement of Work which is consistent between the General Scope and the Description of Work?

A11 – The pre-testing sample has been taken from living room for each unit. The General Scope and the Description of Work is consistent to the design engineer who has certification of a NRPP or NRSB.

Q12 – Statement of Work provides for 30 days Material Procurement. Given that 91 SSD systems, which includes the fans, accessories, and 91 each ECB’s, have to come from the U.S. and are not off-the shelf, 30 days is insufficient time. A minimum of 70 days would be required. Will this be corrected?

A12 – Material procurement is changed to 60 days.

Q13 – Statement of Work, 3.5.1, Certification, states “advanced experience…”. Can government define this and how will this be determined for award purposes?

A13 – Relevant Experience is required for the bid proposal. Contractor submit written evidence demonstrating that the Contractor has successfully designed and installed at least two radon mitigation systems of the same or similar to the type required based on UFGS.

Q14 – Can government confirm that multiple “units” can be worked on simultaneously?

A14 – Contractor can work on simultaneously at multiple units after approval from Housing Office.

Q15 – Solicitation, Section B, Item No. 0001 states “all plant, labor, and materials to design, repair, and install new radon mitigation system at various military family housing (MFH) units on Kadena Air Base, including deploy and retrieve sampling detectors, and repair/replace existing system fans or upgrade mitigation systems, update data base and prepare final report”. Based on the Statement of Work and Description of Work, the following items stated in Section B, Item No 0001 are not defined as a requirement: repair and deploy and retrieve sampling detectors, and repair/replace existing system fans or upgrade mitigation systems, update data base. Are these items in Item No 0001 incorrect?

A15 – These items in Item No.0001 are incorrect. Change to “All plant, labor and materials to design and install new radon mitigation system at various military family housing (MFH) units on Kadena Air Base. All other related work to provide a complete and usable facility are in strict accordance with the Statement of Work (SOW) outlined in Section C.”

Q16 – What if any are requirements for post SSD installation Post Mitigation testing?

A16 – Contractor provide post mitigation testing after install SSD. Add paragraph 4.7 of SOW.

Q17 – Government has stated that ASTM E2121 Standard applies. This Standard applies to Post Mitigation Testing, that Post Mitigation Testing must be performed by Third Party, and this standard has different labeling requirements that the EPA guidance documents. Please advise how ASTM E2121 is to be applied to this solicitation?

A17 – ASTM E2121 is not be applied to this solicitation. The contractor should follow the EPA guidance.

Q18 – Please confirm which bases/installations the housing units are located on.

A18 – All housing units are located on Kadena AB.

If you have any questions, please contact Venice Pamparo at DSN: 634-3541 or by e-mail at venice.pamparo.2@us.af.mil.

//SIGNED//

NICHALOS APSENS

Contracting Officer mailto:venice.pamparo.2@us.af.mil