QJKL_18-0016_-_Site_Visit_Questions.pdf

PDF 42 KB Posted

Attached to
Repair & Maintain Aircraft Parking Apron Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA6633-17-R0001
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Reserve Command

About this file

Site Visit - Questions and Responses

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Repair & Maintain Aircraft Parking Apron, newest first.
File Type Posted
Site_Visit_Sign_In_Roster.pdf PDF
20170303_Wage_Determination_MN96.pdf PDF
Sample_Consent_Letter.docx DOCX document
Financial_Responsibility_Sheet.doc DOC document
FA6633-17-R-0001_Repair_and_Maintain_AC_Parking_Apron.pdf PDF
Drawings.pdf PDF
Technical_Specifications.pdf PDF
PAST_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE.doc DOC document
SF_24_Bid_Bond_Form.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Questions & Responses #001, May 24, 2017 QJKL 18-0016 Repair and Maintain Aircraft Parking Apron

1. QUESTION: Is the prime contractor required to provide any information other than the (up to) 5 Past Performance Questionnaires that will be sent in by past clients?.

RESPONSE: No, just the Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs).

2. QUESTION: Does the prime contractor need to provide their own narrative for each of the PPQ’s that will be sent into the contracting officer?

RESPONSE: No.

3. QUESTION: Is a subcontractor that is completing more than 20% of the contract value also required to have past clients fill out and send in PPQ’s on their behalf or can they provide their own narratives of past performance?

RESPONSE: The subcontractor can provide PPQs, but is not required to. If they do, they would need to submit a signed Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letter for the Release of Past Performance Information to the Prime Contractor, see template that is Attachment 7 in the solicitation.

4. QUESTION: We encountered many corner breaks on the central section of the apron during the site visit. It was mentioned that these were the areas that would be treated as spall repairs. Will the engineers please quantify the required spall repairs in SF units? Did the engineers count the short cracks on the corner breaks in with the total LF quantity of PCC Cracks?

RESPONSE: Yes, the short cracks were counted in the total LF quantity. At this time, we don’t plan to do any spall repairs. All cracked corners can be either treated as an edge repair (i.e. route, clean, and filled as a joint) or if the crack is sufficiently far enough from the corner to be repaired as a longitudinal crack.

5. QUESTION: The spall repair detail on page 12 of the drawings shows that on Step 3 the contractor is supposed to “place joint sealant per ASTM 6690,” which would indicate a hot pour sealant. The technical specs call out self-leveling silicone for all joint sealants. Is this correct that the contractor will use a hot pour sealant for the joints on the spall repairs?

RESPONSE: The detail on page 12 is no longer applicable. The joint sealant should not be a hot pour sealant, but a self-leveling silicone as indicated in the technical specifications (Section 32 01 19).

6. QUESTION: During the pre-bid walk thru there was a question regarding the quantity, location and what is being considered a spall requiring repair vs a cracked corner. Can information be provided as to number of areas, locations, average size and what is being considered as needing repair?

RESPONSE: At this time, we don’t plan to do any spall repairs. All cracked corners can be either treated as an edge repair (i.e. route, clean, and filled as a joint) or if the crack is sufficiently far enough from the corner to be repaired as a longitudinal crack.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .