QandA - QUUG 07-1022.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

496TH ABS SQUADRON (USAFE)

MORÓN AIR BASE

April 2024

MEMORANDUM FOR 496 ABS/PK

FROM: 496 ABS/CEN

SUBJECT: QUUG 07-1022 RPR Small Aircraft Maintenance hangar, B1422

1. Question #1. According to Attachment 2 Specifications QUUG 07-1022 document, page 47 of 495, paragraph 4.1 Classification Certificate of the Contractor, the classification certificate J-1-2 is listed as a requirement:

- Group J: Mechanical Installation.

- Subgroup 1: Lifts or conveyors

- Category 2: Projects with an annual average cost greater than €150,000.00 and not exceeding €360,000.00 However pursuant to Solicitation - FA557525B0001 document, page 31 of 39, Section K - Representations, Certification, & Other Statements, the classification certificate J-1-2 is NOT required. As per site visit held on May 27th and in relation to that discrepancy, it was said that the correct certificate of classifications are the certificates required under Attachment 2 Specifications QUUG 07-1022 document. Therefore, the J-1-2 certificated is NOW required.

In accordance with the Section 09 67 23.14 Chemical Resistant Resinous Flooring, paragraph 2.4.1, it is required a roller floor for storage and handling of aircraft pallets with dimensions of 108x88 inches and to support a total weight of fully loaded pallets, with a minimum static load of 6,000 kg/m². Based on the requirements, such as, dimensions, static load, system typology, manufacturing and bearing structure; this kind of roller floor including associated installation would be not exceeding €150,000.00. Therefore, it is our understanding that the category 2 is not applicable in accordance with the cost involved with the kind and characteristics of the roller floor required under this project.

In light of the above, we respectfully request that the Government reconsider the revision of Category 2 and include the Category 1 requirement in the RFP documentation for this project, as it is more appropriate to the nature of the equipment and scope of the work to be performed (J-1-1).

Answer#1. The J-1-2 classification has not been included for the roller floor, but for the overhead cranes. Therefore, the criteria should be to maintain this classification in the specification.

2. Question #2. The note 10 of drawing C101 indicates: “New Concrete Pavement” and refer to detail D10 in drawing C502. However, regarding detail E7 of drawing C503 reinforced concrete slabs is HA-30 H=30cm. Please clarify.

Answer #2. Detail D10 on drawing C502 is a typical detail for the new exterior slabs.

Detail E7 on drawing C503 is a specific detail for the slabs under the fire water tank. Therefore, for those slabs, E7 applies (30 cm reinforced concrete slab).

3. Question #3. The legend of drawing A401 is incomplete, the reference numbers into the hexagons are missing. Please provide it.

Answer #3 Reviewed and updated. Please refer to drawing A401 (Amendment #1).

4. Question #4. According to detail E10 of drawing A302, there are two new bridge crane systems of 3200 and 6000 LBS. Please confirm that there are two different bridge cranes with different load capacities on the same beam.

Answer#4. It is represented in elevation as a continuous beam, but in reality, it consists of two existing beams, each currently supporting an overhead crane with the same loads as the proposed new one. Elevation has been updated in drawings A302 y SD204. Please refer to these drawings (Amendment #1).

5. Question #5. Regarding the New Roller Floor that appears in drawing A105 and the paragraph 2.4.1 Roller Floor of Section 09 67 23.14, please clarify if this roller floor must be recessed into the existing floor or it is a roller platform with a certain height. If it is a roller platform, please clarify its height.

On the other hand, please clarify the height aircraft pallets in order to right size the roller platform.

Answer#5 The roller floor was proposed as a platform to be defined based on the end user’s needs. The aircraft pallet dimensions provided by the user are: 108 x 88 x 9 inches.

I transcribe the information given by the user

“Sir, I do not have the exact specifications of the roller floor, but I have attached a screenshot of the type of floor I have seen used previously.

Height is not an issue as a forklift will be used to load and unload the pallets.

If the contractor can research this type of flooring and provide the height dimensions available in Europe, it would be perfect.

Please call me to discuss if my message is unclear or if you have any questions.”

6. Question #6. We would like to make an inquiry regarding the required G-1-2 classification under the Project QUUG 07-1022, EDI Small Aircraft Hanger, Moron Air Base, Spain.

According to Solicitation - FA557525B0001 document, page 31 of 39, Section K - Representations, Certification, & Other Statements, the classification certificate G-1-2 is listed as a requirement:

- Group: Roads and Tracks

- Subgroup 1: Roads and Motorways

- Category 2: Projects with an annual average cost greater than €150,000 and not exceeding €360,000

However, pursuant to point 1 of Article 36 Requirement for classification by the Administration of Royal Decree 1098/2001, which approves the General Regulations of the Public Administration Contracts Law—last updated on May 5, 2018—the requirement for classification under a particular subgroup only applies when the nature of the works is ordinary or generic to that classification. In this case, the nature of the works included in the Aircraft Hangar project is not comparable to those included within this specific subgroup.

Specifically, the project does not involve works or main activities related to roads, tracks, or motorways. Therefore, it is our understanding that the classification certificate G-1-2 is not applicable in accordance with the nature of the main scope under this project.

In light of the above, we respectfully request that the Government reconsider the non-inclusion of the G-1-2 classification requirement in the RFP documentation for this project.

Answer#6 This classification was not included on the specifications. No objections to omitting it.

7. Question #7. Fire Alarm and Suppression System. According to the project documentation, the electrical and telecommunications room would be equipped with a water fire extinguishing system, however, the enclosure of the different equipment is classified as IP55 according to the specifications. Is this correct? Watertight enclosures are required for this type of rooms with water extinguishing systems according to NFPA13.

Answer #7. The requirement for fire sprinkler protection in electric rooms in NFPA 13 is voided by a higher requirement for DoD facilities in UFC 3-600-01, which reduces requirements for DoD installations. To prevent catastrophic damages, an additional smoke detector is installed in the electrical room to provide an alarm signal before the sprinkler head is activated, avoiding the damages caused by water before.

8. Question #8. Fire Alarm and Suppression System The project documentation specifies an alarm system from the manufacturer EDWARDS. Would it be possible to consider an alarm system with the same features as the one specified in the project, but from other manufacturers commonly installed at Morón Air Base?"

Answer#8. No, as indicated in specifications section 28 31 70, Edwards is the only acceptable manufacturer for Morón AB. In other words, this is a sole-source manufacturer requirement due to availability of spare parts, licensing and spare parts for Morón AB.

9. Question #9. Grounding and Lightning system. Air terminals are specified as Ø20mm the closest size in the states is ¾”, would it be acceptable?

Answer #9. Section 26 41 00, parag. 2.3.1 Air Terminals has been tailorized to reflect

Spanish local market products, so where the option between ¾” and 20mm air terminals were found the imperial sizes were removed. However, the intent of the project design is to comply with NFPA 780 Class I material requirements so ¾” solid air terminals will also be acceptable. For clarity, regarding Class I material requirements, tubular air terminals are not allowed per UFC, only solid terminals, ¾” or higher (Ø20mm diam), and stainless steel material as specified in project specifications section 26 41 00.

10. Question #10. Lightning System. Lighting fixture of the drawings type A (EL601) does not match with type A on specs (2.2), same thing occurs with type C. Which is correct?

Answer #10. The luminaire models described in the specification are adequate, but the nomenclature (Type) is incorrect. Please see the updated section 26 51 00 (Amendment #1). (Changes marked in red)

11. Question #11. Lightning System. Drawings does not shown DALI drivers however specs 26

51 00 @ 2.5.1 n) call for DALI drivers. Would be Dali drivers required in all the lighting fixtures or just in the ones that are going to need it because of the control scenes yes or not?

Which luminaires must be provided with DALI system?

Answer #11. Drawings do not need to reflect the driver types of the luminaires. DALI drivers are only required in the luminaires that require a lighting control system, reflected as those connected in the drawings to some type of occupancy/vacancy sensor or daylight sensor, which will control the operation of the associated lighting fixtures an.d a shop drawing for the lighting control system has to be submitted under section 26 51 00 The submittal title has been updated for greater clarity. Please refer to updated section 26 51 00 (Amendment #1). (Changes marked in red)

12. Question #12 Air Compressed. According to the project plans, the room where the air compressor will be located lacks a ventilation system and only includes exhaust. Would it be necessary to include ventilation to ensure the proper functioning of the equipment in this space? The project documentation does not include the technical data of the existing compressor to be reinstalled. Would it be possible to obtain this information? Has the room layout been planned based on the actual volumes of the equipment? Has access for maintenance tasks been considered?

Answer#12. The proposed ventilation system is based on air extraction using an exhaust fan and air intake through the door grille. The grille was missing from the drawings; it has now been updated – see drawing MH102 (Amendment #1). The air compressor is to be re-installed. Model: Ingersoll Rand 2545, Serial Number: 1136122. The existing equipment’s dimensions and maintenance clearances have been considered in accordance with UFC requirements.

13. Question #13. Air Compressed. According to the project specifications, section 22 15 26.00

20, compressed air piping must be made of stainless steel. However, the legends on the drawings indicate galvanized steel.

What material should be used for installation? Would it be possible to install the entire piping system of aluminum?

Answer #13. Compressed air piping must be made of stainless steel

14. Question #14. Air Compressed. Additionally, on drawing PP601 – PLUMBING AND

COMPRESSED AIR PLAN – Plumbing isometry, the indicated pipe diameter for compressed air is D12 (1/2") for the main line, and D20 (3/4") for service points pipes. Is this correct?

The project specifications for this section refer to a Schedule 40, which has not been found.

Could you provide it?

Answer #14 There was an error in the drawings regarding the pipe diameters. The main line diameter is 1 1/2 inch, instead of 1/2 inch. Please see the corrected drawing PP101 and PP601 (Amendment #1). As mentioned in the previous response, according to the UFC, Schedule 40 is required and this must be maintained.

15. For any technical questions related to this task order, please contact Mr. Alberto Menendez at DSN #722-8053 or comm. +34 955848053.

ALBERTO MENÉNDEZ

Technical Architect