CEMACC_RFI__6.docx

RFI #6 14 Feb-2017

****Note to Offerors: The Government believes that these are the final RFI Responses. We do not anticipate any further Amendments. Any reference in RFI questions to a forthcoming amendment was referring to Amendment 0001 which has already been issued.****

1. Question: During the site visit presentation you said we have to complete Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices. We are assuming you are looking for our expected increase for each year of the MACC. How would you like us to present that information? As a percentage, with the first year as 0%? Or would you like us to enter our total bid price amount for the first year and indicate percent increases based on that initial amount?

Answer: Do not insert any prices in the Section B of the RFP. Your prices that will be used for evaluation of the TEP(Total Estimated Price) will be submitted on the Atch #16. Refer to l-900 of the solicitation.

2. Question:For the Building 149 project no paint is mentioned in the Statement of Work, although the existing cmu walls are painted. Are the walls to be painted? If so, please provide specs.

Answer: Yes, new walls and existing walls that are altered during construction will need to be painted. Specifications are to be provided by CEMACC Design-Build Contractor’s AE Firm.

3. Question:What is the current manufacturer and model of existing HVAC units at both Building 149 and Building 140 project sites?

Answer: Govt does not know.

4. Question:What existing control systems will the new HVAC units be tying back into for both Building 149 and 140?

Answer: Bldg 149 Addition will be standalone. Bldg 140 controls have been changed to Bacnet/ADS/JACE with version 3 software.

5. Question:Can you provide structural drawings/information for the existing concrete airfield pavement that is expected to be drilled to run electrical to the new tensioned fabric structure?

Answer: No such information exists.

6. Question:The Scope of Work for the Building 149 project doesn’t list any demo. And, based on the Revised Plan, there are structures which would require modification and aren’t shown on the Plan. For example, the overhead door in the existing D/U Cell. Can you please provide information about which structures are to be demo’d, and their expected replacement?

Answer: Revised Floor Plan shows final layout. It is the Design-Build Contractor responsibility to recognize walls or portion of walls to be removed. Based on Revised Floor Plan dated 03JUN2016, CMU walls to be removed and new CMU walls matching existing )

7. Can you provide a Revised Plan for the Building 149 project which gives a better idea of scale? The Revised Plan and the A-101 drawing for the addition do not match-up. Perhaps the Revised Plan can be super-imposed/shown on the A-101 drawing for a better idea of scale? Noto be installed as shown in hatching

8. Question: Are there any flooring finishes for B149? Demo of existing cmu will leave rough floor.

Answer: Existing concrete slab is floor finish.

9. Question - Will separate Superintendent, Quality Control, and Safety personnel be required at each demonstration project site, or will the personnel be able to share roles across the three projects?

Answer: Per CEMACC SOW paragraph 1.28 Quality Control, Quality Control responsibilities, program, and records are required

10. Question: What is the manufacturer of the existing fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems for Building 149 and 140? And is there an existing service contract for each? Bldg 140 Fire Alarm/Mass Notification system is Notifier installed in 2011. Bldg 149 Fire Alarm/Mass Notification system is Notifier installed approx. 2014.

Answer: CE Alarm Shop handles work orders after warranty period of all Fire Alarm/Mass Notification systems on Robins.

11.Question: The SOW for the Building 140 project doesn’t mention paint for the drywall or doors and door frames. Do you want these items painted? If so, please provide specs. As a part of a complete and usable facility, paint on new and existing surfaces will be required.

Answer: UFGS paint specifications will be edited by successful offeror’s AE Design Team as part of design submittals to GOVT.

12. Question: Reference Project UHHZ150376 (Construct/Install C17 Fabric Shelter at N-27) SOW paragraph 2.B.I. and attached drawing, it appears as though the requested dimensions do not permit a C-17 to enter the structure without proper clearance for the winglets. Please clarify intent of structure and/or required dimensions.

Answer: The dimension 23’-4 1/16” is incorrectly located

Question: What is the due date for all RFIs to be submitted following the site visit?

Answer: (5) five calendar days Question: Volume II – Written Technical Proposal states a page limit of 40 pages including “charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc.” This would be a narrow requirement if the RFP had only one seed project, but with three projects requiring design narratives, design analysis, construction narratives, drawings, and numerous AF forms, in addition to the overall Program Management Plan, please consider either increasing the page limit closer to 100 pages or exclude the Demonstration Project deliverables from the page count in their entirety.

Answer: No Question: Please clarify the level of detail requested for catalog cuts/brochures for Comprehensive Interior Design (CIDs) listed as requirements of the 10% Construction Design Package. These requirements seem excessive for a 10% Design submittal and drastically impede on the 40 page limit for Volume 2.

Answer: Sufficient to convey understanding of project requirements

Question: C17 Fabric Shelter at N-27 states, “Anchor attachments/points will be into existing concrete airfield The CEMACC IDIQ Statement of Work Project Description for UHHZ 150376 Construct/Install paving which is approximately (16”) sixteen inches thick.” Additionally, in section 1.9 Foundation Design it states, “The contractor shall provide shop drawings for the following items: calculations, foundation/anchoring requirements, anchor bolt plan, …Design systems for the building shall be based on the maximum column/truss reactions.” There is not enough information to complete the 10% design. In order to calculate the structural design and adequacy as directed to attach to the existing paving, we need additional information on the paving including but not limited to strength, reinforcing, exact thickness, joint layout and spacing, etc. Without this information we cannot accurately calculate whether the existing pavement is a sufficient anchor for this large structure. If the pavement will not provide enough resistance to the uplift calculations, or will not support the load of the structure, then additional foundation design will be required.

Answer: Existing airfield pavement is approximately 16” thick; existing joint spacing is approximately 25’-0” x 25’-0”; existing airfield pavement is approximately 4000psi; existing airfield pavement is unreinforced

Question: Do any of the areas encompassing the demonstration projects contain SCIFs? Answer: No

Question: Will photos be allowed during the site visit at all three Demonstration Project locations? If not, will the Government provide a designated representative authorized to take required photos and issue an amendment containing the images?

Answer: No Question: Are there any LEED design points or considerations requirements for the Demonstration Projects?

Answer: Consideration to meet LEED™ Certified 30 – 37 points for projects UHHZ 160082 and UHHZ 160049 through Mechanical and Electrical energy savings, recycle content and sustainability of materials used, other areas where possible LEED™ point can be Question: The RFP requirements for the demonstration projects list the deliverables on pages 42-44 of the Solicitation for Demonstration projects 1&3 and refers to the 10% Construction Design (See CEMACC SOW paragraph 1.4.1) including:

a. Drawings

b. Specifications

c. Design Analysis

d. AF Forms – 3052, 3064, 3065, Schedule of Values However, CEMACC SOW paragraph 1.4.1 lists the 10% design submittals in 1.4.1 as:

a. Statement of Work

b. 1.4.1.1 Technical Analysis

c. 1.4.1.2 Drawings

d. 1.4.1.3 Specifications Outline Attachment 1 CEMACC SOW paragraph 1.4.1 does not include requirements for any AF Forms including a Schedule of Value OR AF 66 Submittal Register.

In fact, the CEMACC SOW states that AF Form 66 Submittal Register is not required until the 60% Design Submission and a final is shown in the 100% Submission in 1.4.5.4.

Since the CEMACC SOW does not require a Submittal Register or AF forms for 10% Design Submittal, please confirm these are not required for the 10% Design submittal to be included within our technical proposal response to the RFP.

Answer: Individual Task Orders/Statement or Work provide more detail of specific project requirements.

Question: Conflicts exist with the Design-Build A/E 10% design requirements in the Solicitation, CEMACC Scope of Work, and Demonstration Project scope of work. Please clarify the exact deliverables required for this 10% Design submittal within Volume II of our proposal submission.

Answer: See response previously provided in prior RFI’S Question: I noticed the SOW and the RFI mention an existing Daiken system. Do you have any information on this unit or associated ductwork? Is this unit in our area of work?

Answer: The ground mounted Daikin unit was USER installed and is not considered real property and not maintained by CE, therefore cannot be utilized if intended for cooling load in D/U Cell. Maintenance and repair is the responsibility of the USER.

Question: What will the dry and wet respirator rooms be used for? Is there any machinery in there?

Answer: GOVT employees to clean and/or store respirators. No machinery.