Question-Answers #2 to FBO.pdf

Question/Answers #2 20 August 2009

The questions and answers below comprise all questions submitted by contractors from 12 AUG

09 through 18 AUG 09. If there is a question that isn’t included in this document and was submitted, please contact A1C Kimberly DeLong at kimberly.delong@tinker.af.mil.

RFI

# Subject Question/Answer

121 Contracting

I am in the process of going through the Solicitation and wanted to know if the status “Total Small Business Set Aside” still applies to this contract or if the status has changed?

Total Small Business Set Aside still applies

122 Contracting

I am trying to get a complete list of the email address for the general contractors bidding this project. I was told you could help me.

Do not have that information. The solicitation is posted electronically, therefore, this office has no idea the amount of contractors that received the solicitation.

123 Design/Build

For the 2 Design-Build Seed projects, the plans you were provided were PDF files. Is it possible to get the CADD files for those drawings?

CADD drawings are provided along with Amendment 3.

SEED A-

WWYK07088

The break area has a current seating capacity of 60, and the SOW requires that this capacity be maintained. Under IBC 2006, Section 1019, this occupancy requires a minimum of two exits.

This requires the work for this project to extend into the adjacent area to the South. Is it acceptable to assume continued availability of the area South of the break area as a means of egress?

Yes.

WWYK07088

Under UFC 3-310-04 "Seismic Design for Buildings"

(supersedes TI809-04), a suspended ceiling, and its mechanical and lighting components, are to be suspended from structure, and shall include bi-directional sway bracing. Due to the quantity of mechanical and electrical equipment, cable trays, piping, etc.

between the break area and the building roof structure, and also due to the length of suspension wires required to reach the structure, it does not appear feasible to install a suspended ceiling system which conforms to this UFC. Shall the requirement to mailto:kimberly.delong@tinker.af.mil meet this UFC be waived, or will alternative ceiling systems be considered?

The seismic requirements for the seismic zone for Oklahoma does not require bi-directional sway bracing. The UFC does not appear to require this bracing for suspended ceilings for zones below 3; Oklahoma is in zones 1 and 2A.

WWYK07088

Installation of a ceiling and doors, followed by installation of new lighting, extension of fire sprinklers, and ducting of Building

3001 ambient air into and out of the newly-enclosed space, would appear to serve no purpose other than aesthetic, and in fact would appear to be an actual impediment to comfort within the break area environment. Please note that, due to obstacles above, the ceiling height would be limited to 8' or less. Would elimination of the ceiling and doors from the project scope be considered?

No.

WWYK07088

The existing walls surrounding the break area are exactly 8' high and are in good condition. However, there appears to be a quantity of compressed air line, water piping, and both rigid and flex conduit on top of some of the walls. Please confirm that these are abandoned and can safely be demolished during replacement of the walls as required by the SOW. Because construction of new stud and GWB inside the face of the existing walls would reduce the available floor area of the break room, in case demolition and replacement of the existing walls is not feasible for the reasons stated above, would a reduction in seating capacity be considered? Please note that under IBC 2006,

1014.4.3 "Seating at tables", there are specific requirements for aisle access way width, with which the existing seating arrangement does not comply, and with which compliance is even less likely given a reduced floor area. If a reduction in seating capacity is entirely unacceptable, would an option be considered to leave the existing walls in place, installing additional power receptacles as needed, and repainting.

The existing walls surrounding the break area are exactly 8' high and are in good condition. However, there appears to be a quantity of compressed air line, water piping, and both rigid and flex conduit on top of some of the walls. Please confirm that these are abandoned and can safely be demolished during replacement of the walls as required by the SOW. These are active lines and will need to be rerouted. Because construction of new stud and GWB inside the face of the existing walls would reduce the available floor area of the break room, in case demolition and replacement of the existing walls is not feasible for the reasons stated above, would a reduction in seating capacity be considered? Contractor has 2 options: 1-Replace existing walls with new or 2-Repair the existing wall to meet new requirements. It is not acceptable to the Government to leave the existing wall in place and building a new wall adjacent to the inside face of the old wall. Please note that under

IBC 2006, 1014.4.3 "Seating at tables", there are specific requirements for aisle access way width, with which the existing seating arrangement does not comply, and with which compliance is even less likely given a reduced floor area. If a reduction in seating capacity is entirely unacceptable, would an option be considered to leave the existing walls in place, installing additional power receptacles as needed, and repainting.

Yes.

SEED B-

WWYK070244

Drawings 1/A04 and 1/A05 are not plotted to the scale shown, and none of the drawings for either Area A or Area B include dimension strings. Will accurately scalable, or dimensioned drawings of both areas within the scope be issued, or are approximations with disclaimer notes acceptable in the construction drawings for this project?

Approximations or verification notes will be acceptable.

WWYK070244

Drawing 1/A04 indicates demolition of the existing O'Brien panels. Drawing 1/A05, purporting to be the Renovation Plan, appears to show these panels still in place. Is it intended that the new stud wall construction shall precisely follow the previous layout of the O'Brien panel system, or is this a drafting error?

New wall construction shall follow existing layout.

WWYK07088

Within Q&A # 1 date 8/13/09, RFI # 14 provides the power requirements for the new ice maker. The new arrangement and utilization of space for user equipment and furnishings are unknown. The following assumptions are being made in accordance with the information provided in the SOW: Existing seating capacity shall remain the same, the existing lockers should be permanently relocated to accept new power receptacles and two computer kiosks. With the goal of properly locating receptacles for the ice maker and computer kiosks, what footprint size and dimension will these items encompass and where will they be located?

There will be an Ice Maker (Approximately 2.5’w x 2.5’d x 6’h) to be located on the west wall near the sink

WWYK07088

Q & A # 1 RFI # 34 it is indicated that no data or communication rough in is required. While discussing the computer requirements, please confirm this answer is correct. The computers in this area will only require power and not communication or data connections.

Rough-ins for data cables/connectors will be required for a later date (actual cable/connector installation to be provided by

Government).

WWYK07088 Will outside air be required for the ventilation of this space?

No. Shop air shall be used.

WWYK070244

Q & A #1, RFI # 49 directs the transition to meet ADA. Since the change in elevation is ~4" the ramp will extend 4 feet out into the aisle and will encroach on the aircraft hanger limits. Furthermore the wings of the ramp will extend further to the east and west with a total dimension footprint of 4' by 24' to create a proper

ADA transition. In light of these facts is it required that the ramp meet ADA?

Transition shall meet ADA.

WWYK070244

Miscellaneous wall patches were noticed during the site visit with the user but were not indicated to be removed and filled with gypsum wall assembly as is noted in the SW corner of Area A.

Shall these covers be painted over or filled with a similar assembly as indicated?

The question is unclear. If the covers in question provide access to equipment, then these shall be painted. If the covers lead to nothing, then these need to be removed and filled with similar material to give the existing walls a uniform surface.

135 Design/Build

Within Q&A #1 RFI #s 117, 118, and 119 are answered by directing the design effort to Attachment 2 Contract Statement of

Work Section A paragraph 1.1.1. In reference to project specifications within the design effort, it is directed to use UFGS specifications. May these specifications be referenced in the drawings or design analysis in lieu of printing hard copies of the specifications to be turned in with the proposal? Since UFGS are unable to be edited, it is more time effective and project specific to use other industry standard specification databases. As an alternative to merely referencing UFGS in the design, may BSD

SPECLINK be used to draft specifications for this design effort?

Contractor shall provide hard copies of the specs with their proposal. Software to edit the UFGS specs is available for free at http://specsintact.ksc.nasa.gov.

136 SEED A & B

The following attachments or additional information was referenced in Q&A #1: Seed A and B Revised SOW, RFI # 61

User's Power Requirements. Please provide these attachments as soon as possible.

This information has already been provided. Refer to

“back_shop_foot_print.xlsx” for WWYK070244 and responses to RFIs for WWYK070088.

WWYK070244

In the responses to questions received in Amendment 002, answers to several questions made reference to WWYK950028

As Builts. These have not been included with any of the RFP material that we have found. In the Amendment 001 package, there is a file named “Asbuilts_950028_AHU_5-6-7.pdf”, however it does not contain the 950028 drawings, it contains

WWYK920046 drawings. Those drawings do not cover the same area of the building. Please provide the referenced as built drawings.

Correct WWYK950028 asbuilts are provided with Amendment 3.

WWYK070244

Amendment 001 included a file labeled

“back_shop_foot_print.xlsx” that is a sketch of the equipment layout for the remodeled are in B2122. There is a band saw and disk sander shown. Many times, these have or require exhaust systems. This may impact the ventilation design. Do these (or any other equipment) either already have, or will require exhaust systems in this area?

No.

139 Contracting

As soon as practicable, offerors shall complete Section 1 of the

Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 9) and e-mail it and the Performance Questionnaire Letter (Attachment 10) to all points of contact (POCs) the offeror has listed in the Past

Performance Information Sheet(s) (Attachment 11) for all projects within the past three years from the date of the solicitation. In the above paragraph (see bold and underlined) it refers to all projects. Does this mean we are required to submit all projects peformed in the last three years? Our understanding is that there is a minimum of 3 projects required.

Clarification - the offeror (prime contractor) shall complete

Section 1 of the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 9) and e-mail it and the Performance Questionnaire Letter

(Attachment 10) to all points of contact (POCs) the offereor has listed in the Past Performance Information Sheet(s) (Attachment

11) for ALL projects within the past three years from the date of the solicitation. Each major subcontractor (effort on this acquisition is projected to be 25% or more of the value of work) shall provide the past performance questionnaire from a minimum of three (3) references.

SEED F-

WWYK070094

For three sets of restrooms, the plans show a new door being cut in for either a janitors closet or due to rerouting the entrance. Have these door locations been coordinated with the onsite existing conditions so they do not interfere with any existing utilities or equipment? Restroom Y89 shows a new door for a janitors closet and during our collective onsite walk through we conducted with the base my notes stated that there was little to no room for an additional door. Can you please verify that there are no utilities or equipment interfering with these new door locations?

See WWYK070094- Revision 1 drawings provided along with

Amendment 3.