QA_RprCadetChapUSAFA_7Nov17.pdf

FA8903-17-R-0071 D-B-B Repair Cadet Chapel at United States Air Force Academy, CO Questions and Answers

FA8903-17-R-0071

Offeror Generated Question Document Page # Government Response

The draft solicitation references attached forms for team members and projects (PIW). May we use our own forms if we include the same information in the same order?

USAFA_Cadet_Chapel_- _Draft_Section_L_Step1_- _11AUG2017.pdf

14 For consistency and to limit quantity of data allowed, Offerors are required to use the forms provided.

Does the Historic Treatment Specialist need to be a third party or can the prime use in-house expertise, if available to be on site?

USAFA_Cadet_Chapel_- _Draft_Section_L_Step1_- _11AUG2017.pdf

14 The prime may use in-house expertise. Clarified in Step 1, Section L, Factor 4

Please clarify section 4.3.3 Technical Factor 2, Team Experience for Specialized Scope, section a.) “submitted projects must demonstrate direct experience not experience as a general contractor.” What does “direct experience” mean? Many construction companies that specialize in the restoration of historic facilities are

USAFA_Cadet_Chapel_- _Draft_Section_L_Step1_- _11AUG2017.pdf

14 Offeror may utilize self perform (i.e. in-house) capabilities or proposed subcontractor(s) experience. Direct experience means that Offeror and/or subcontractor actually performed the specialized scope. Step 1, Section L, Factor 2 language revised to clarify.

FA8903-17-R-0071

Please clarify section 4.3.3 Technical Factor 2, Team Experience for Specialized Scope, section b. 1) “submit two project submissions for team member responsible for custom fabrication (not installer or prime contractor) of exterior metal envelop...”

Are you asking us to lock in sub consultants and include their info in the Phase I proposal stage? We are unclear of what “not installer or prime contractor” means.

USAFA_Cadet_Chapel_- _Draft_Section_L_Step1_- _11AUG2017.pdf

14 Submitted projects must demonstrate direct experience (prime contractor in-house or proposed subcontractor) performing the fabrication, construction, or restoration work described. Experience as a general contractor or installer without demonstration of direct experience fabricating, constructing, or restoring will not be considered. The Government is requesting that the Offeror submit the qualifications of the subcontractor(s) whom they intend to utilize for the performance of this project in the Phase I (i.e. Factor 2). The Government does not require the prime or the subcontractor(s) to enter into exclusive teaming agreements. However, if awarded the contract, the Offeror will be required to utilize those specialty scope in-house/subcontractors proposed in Phase I.

FA8903-17-R-0071

Please clarify section 4.3.3 Technical Factor 2, Team Experience for Specialized Scope, section b. 2) “submit five project descriptions of teaming member (not prime contractor) responsible for plaster...” Are you asking us to lock in sub consultants and include their info in the Phase I proposal stage?

[This question applies to 4) storefront glazing; 5) selective demolition; 6) organ work; 7) historic wooden pews.

This question and response does not apply equally to all the parts listed.

Each subpart has a specific requirement in terms of which entity/entities is required to submit the requested project descriptions.

For example, subparts 2, 3, 4 and 6 require project descriptions from a "teaming member(s)". Whereas, subpart 5 allows either a the prime contractor OR teaming member to submit the project descriptions.

And, supart 7 requiers the contractor to submit the project descriptions. Recommend you tailor

15 Submitted projects must demonstrate direct experience (prime contractor in-house or subcontractor) performing the fabrication, construction, or restoration work described.

Experience as a general contractor or installer without demonstration of direct experience fabricating, constructing, or restoring will not be considered. The Government is requesting that the Offeror submit the qualifications of the subcontractor(s) whom they intend to utilize for the performance of this project in the Phase I (i.e.

Factor 2). The Government does not require the prime or the subcontractor(s) to enter into exclusive teaming agreements. However, if awarded the contract, the Offeror will be required to utilize those specialty scope in-house/subcontractors proposed in Phase I.

FA8903-17-R-0071

Please clarify section 4.3.3 Technical Factor 2, Team Experience for Specialized Scope, section b. 3) “submit five project descriptions for teaming member (not prime contractor) responsible for fabrication of stained glass dalles de verre windows...” Are you asking us to lock in sub consultants and include their info in the Phase I proposal stage?

USAFA_Cadet_Chapel_- _Draft_Section_L_Step1_- _11AUG2017.pdf

15 Submitted projects must demonstrate direct experience (prime contractor in-house or subcontractor) performing the fabrication, construction, or restoration work described.

Experience as a general contractor or installer without demonstration of direct experience fabricating, constructing, or restoring will not be considered. The Government is requesting that the Offeror submit the qualifications of the subcontractor(s) whom they intend to utilize for the performance of this project in the Phase I (i.e.

Factor 2). The Government does not require the prime or the subcontractor(s) to enter into exclusive teaming agreements. However, if awarded the contract, the Offeror will be required to utilize those specialty scope in-house/subcontractors proposed in Phase I.

Is there a reason for the dalles de verre window fabrication requirement? The actual work is not dalles de verre but metal framed glass with no epoxy.

Should the requirement be a company that can cast the replacement glass that is requested in the RFP and has experience removing, cataloging, storing and reinstalling window systems? There are a couple dalles de verre windows but they are not part of the project, just protecting them. Please advise.

USAFA_Cadet_Chapel_- _Draft_Section_L_Step1_- _11AUG2017.pdf and Draft Design Drawings and Draft Specifications

While the work is existing dalle de verre glass blocks are set into an aluminum frame with thiocol sealant, the work on these strip windows needs to be done using conservation methodologies. The qualifications for this work are to be provided as specified.

FA8903-17-R-0071

Given the special nature of this project, it might be a risk to the government to have prime contractors lock in specialty trade contractors at Phase I. This may reduce price competition because primes will request specialty contractors make exclusive agreements, which may preclude the best trade contractors moving to Phase II. More customary in a Best Value Competion, Primes submit key trade partners at Phase II once they have had a chance to collect pricing and approach.

N/A N/A Due to specialized nature of this project, the Government has determined that the specialized scope elements are an essential part of the Prequalification of Sources.

Prime/subcontractors are not required to enter into exclusive agreements. The prime will be required to utilize the team member(s) submitted in Phase I for specialty scope elements if awarded the contract.

Given the nature of a Best Value Phase II proposal, it is very difficult to get PPQs and special forms from trade partners.

In order to give the government the Best Value, trade parters will be turning in their price proposals with moments to spare.

PPQs are only required for Factor 1. Special forms are being provided by the Government to ensure order and consistency. Prime's may fill out the forms (if necessary) for their teaming partners. Step 2 will include sufficient time for Offerors to request price proposals from their selected team members..

To what degree will the AFCEC control the selection of specialty subcontractors? Will the AFCEC be able to insist upon using a particular specialty subcontractor, or will prime contractors' bids simply be evaluated as-is? Step One, Section L 16

The prequalification solicitation requires the prime to submit projects demonstrating experience (in-house or subcontractor) for specialty scope elements (Factor 2). The prime will be required will be expected to utilize the same team members submitted in Step 1 for performance of the contract.

FA8903-17-R-0071

11 Will specialty subcontractors be required to carry their own bonding, or will specialty subcontractors fall under prime contractor's bonding? Step One, Section L 11

The Government only requires bonds from the Offeror. The Government does not require bonds from subcontractor(s). However, this does not preclude prime contractors from requiring bonds from their subcontractors if that is their practice.

Will prime contractors be able to communicate with project consultants hired by the AFCEC? Prime contractors may not be able to adequately judge the unique capabilities of specialty subcontractors without the help of a consultant (specifically referring to the pipe organ restoration component of the project) N/A N/A

No. The required experience for specialty subcontractors is included in the RFP. All questions must be submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer.

Section 1.4.3 states that a Lightning Protection and Grounding System test plan must be provided. Section 1.4.4 states that inspections must include the witnessing of ground resistance measurements for ground rods with test wells. No existence of test wells or ground rods were confirmed during the site walk on 3 Aug 2017. If they do exist, what are their locations? If they do not exist, how must we proceed with the testing and inspecting of grounding components for the requirements set forth in sections 1.4.3 and 1.4.4?

Specifications-26-20-00 Section 26 41 00 Lightning Protection Systems 11/13 Section 1.4.3 and Section

1.4.4 3

Ground rods with test wells will need to be verified by the Contractor in the field. If they do not exist or are not accessible, alternate testing means shall be submitted for approval and provided.

FA8903-17-R-0071

Can it be confirmed that the existing grounding system meets the current NFPA 780, UL96A, AFI 32-1065 and UFC 3-575-01 Standards for a class II structure?

1.)UFC 3-575-01

2.)2017 NFPA780

3.)2014 UL96A

4.) AFI 32-1065

1.)UFC PG10 2-1-1

2.)PG11

3.)PG65

4.)PG31

The scope of work for this Contractor shall include validating the existing grounding and lightning protection system and its compliance with applicable codes listed.

Detail sheet EG601, key note 2 states that the existing #2 bonding jumper and grounding electrodes are to remain and be reused. However, the existing #2 cable does not meet class 2 requirements? How would you have us proceed? 13-0110^2306^EG601 DWG Drawing # EG601

If the existing grounding system conductors and components are not accessible to be validated and/or tested by the Contractor, alternate means of compliance with applicable codes shall be submitted for approval and provided.

FA8903-17-R-0071

Document requests submital of 5 project descriptions in last 5 years for Dalles de Verre in historic buildings. This requirement may be pretty unrealstic to full-fill as this medium was largely popular in the 1960's and 1970's and has mostly fallen out of favor - Certainly in "Historic Buildings". The dalles at theupper section of the Cadet Chapel are not fabricated in a very tradtional method as they are assmebled in an aluminum matrix (the lower windows are the traditional cement or epoxy matrix, but are not part of the project scope). This makes specific experience with Dalle de Verre less applicable. For this project experience with large scale projects in historic buildings both secular and non-secular, complex staginig and scheduling , detailed documentation, and understanding the submittal process are all much more applicable when considering experience. Would projects that demonstrate these capabilities be acceptable as opposed to only dalle de verre as indicated? Step One, Section L 18

Section L, Step 1 requires submission of five (5) project descriptions for Dalles de Verre having achieved substantial completion within the last fifteen (15) years of the date of release of this solicitation.

While the work is existing dalle de verre glass blocks are set into an aluminum frame with thiocol sealant, the work on these strip windows needs to be done using conservation methodologies. The project experience for large scale project with complex staging and scheduling are relevant to the overall project but for the historic glazing, the requirements identified for the dalles de verre need to be met.

Qualifications for this work will be revised to require: Submit five (5) project descriptions having achieved substantial completion for fabrication or replication of Dalles de Verre glazing to facilities as described in Specifications 08 01 80. In lieu of submission of five (5) Dalles de Verre projects, up to three (3) project descriptions will be considered for projects having achieved substantial completion which include replication of existing stained glass, matching color and appearance as described in Specifications 08 01 80. These projects may be substituted for Dalles de Verre project descriptions, but a total of five (5) projects must

17 3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: What is perimeter of construction containment area? Safe zones?

Appendix E, Draft Final Design, 12 Oct 2017 Drawing G-004

The anticipated area of work for this project is shown on plan G-004. Contractor is to limit all construction activities and disturbances to this area. Area of disturbance will be approximately

4.0 acres.

FA8903-17-R-0071

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: Are original drawings still available? Can they be made available for contractors?

Appendix G, Historical documents N/A

Original drawings are available and will be made available to the contractor after award.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: Will chapel be 100% closed during construction? How is base handling worship services during construction? N/A N/A

Yes, chapel will be 100% closed. Worship services will be conducted at alternate location(s)

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: What kind of electrical service feeds the blowers (organ related)?

Specification Sections 12 01 91, 3.5.1 and 12 01 92, 3.3

Specification Sections 12 01 91,

3.5.1 and 12 01 92, 3.3

The existing motor control center, rated 480-volt, 3-phase and located in the basement mechanical room presently feeds the blowers for the Protestant and Catholic organs.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: Where has ACM been identified?

Appendice E, Draft Final Design, 12 Oct 2017

Drawings HA201 and HA202

See sheets HA201 and HA202 and as noted on other HA sheets.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: What are the humidity swings in chapel (organ related)? N/A N/A

An existing humidification system is provided for the organ blower room but does not appear to be currently functioning. Humidity in the building is not otherwise controlled except by the air conditioning system.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: Where does humidification come from (organ related)? N/A N/A

The humidification system for the organ blower room is located against the south wall of the basement mechanical room. The humidification system is a DriSteem system with water softner installed in 2000. The humidification is introduced into the supply air duct after the reheat coil in the mechanical room.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: Who or what company currently performs maintenance on the pipe organ(s)? N/A N/A

The Pipe organs are maintained by Norman Lane & Co., Denver Colorado

FA8903-17-R-0071

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: What artifacts will be responsibility of GC?

Specification Section 01 11 00, 1.4.c. 2

USAFA will remove all artifacts from the Chapels prior to start of construction. The inventory provided to the Contractor will identify any remaining fixtures, furnishings and equipment that will remain in the building during construction.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: How well are the existing dimensions and locations of the structural steel trusses known? N/A N/A

Original construction documents and photographs indicate that structural steel frames were shop fabricated and shipped to the Colorado Springs on rail car. Based on this, it is believed that similar steel frame elements (lower steel tetrahedron frames for example), were fabricated to consistent dimensions, within shop tolerances. Steel frames were designed to be bolted and welded together after assembly on the building. Field tolerances are expected for field assembly.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: How much variability between the design drawings and the actual conditions are anticipated? N/A N/A

Current design drawings are based on the available original shop drawings for the structural steel and the cladding. Current design drawings state that dimensions should be field verified by contractor before beginning fabrication work that relies on as-constructed dimensions. A field survey by the contractor of the steel frame, after removal of the existing cladding, may be necessary to establish as-constructed dimensions.

FA8903-17-R-0071

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: How are the weather-resistant metal panels intended to be fabricated to the exact dimensions for each location's custom dimensions? N/A N/A

The dimensions of the weather-resistant panels are dependent on the dimensions of the steel tetrahedron frames. Based on the answer to Q.

26 above, the tetrahedron frames are anticipated to be relatively consistent between similar tetrahedrons, pending confirmation by contractor field survey.

3 Aug 2017 Site Visit: Is the intent to build templates to use to fabricate the panels? N/A N/A

Means and methods of fabricating panels are contractor’s responsibility. One anticipated approach is that contractor will field survey the structural steel frame and establish panel dimensions that accommodate most of the panels. Current design drawings provide a joint between the weather-resistant panels and the weather-resistant covers to facilitate some construction tolerance and anticipated movements. The contractor field survey may reveal the need for some "special" size panels for cases where the structural steel frame dimensions are significantly outside the common frame dimensions.

Can we remove one of the stain glass panels in the Protestant chapel and take back to our studio to use in the development of our proposal N/A N/A

No, this is not a feasible approach at this time.

Pieces cannot be removed until following award to the successful construction contractor. Please note that the chapel is open to the public and that all contractors are highly encouraged to visit the chapel in order to better understand the scope requirements.

FA8903-17-R-0071

In regards to team member qualifications as related to the Dalle de Verre work at the Cadet Chapel. The qualification requirements that the Government requested state that Offerors must submit documentation demonstrating that they are an accredited member in good standing of the SGAA and that the craftsman responsible for the work ALSO holds an accreditation as a professional artist/designer with the SGAA. The SGAA only allows one or the other, not both.

Section L Step 1 ITO Prqual 13 Oct 17 Page 18

Based on confirmation with SGAA, this evaluation criteria was changed to remove the requirement for an accreditation as a professional artist/designer. A studio accreditation is required.

Would you mind quickly telling me who the best point of contact is to discuss art procurement for the Repair the CADET Chapel at the USAF Academy project? N/A N/A

This is a construction renovation project. There will not be any art procurement in the scope.

Please confirm the due date of the Step 1 submittal. Upon review of the solicitation documents there is no printed stipulation of the Response date.

The only confirmed reference is on the right hand side of the FBO.gov page listed under General Information as November 21, 2017 2:00pm Central.

Please confirm this delivery due date.

FBO.gov website N/A The Step 1 response date is: Nov 21, 2017 2:00 pm Central

FA8903-17-R-0071

Please issue an Evaluation Factors listing for the STEP 2 award criteria similar how this is documented on the STEP 1 in document Section M Evaluation Factors for Prequalification. We would like to see how the Government intends to place importance on the Technical Factors 1-5 in STEP 2.

Section M Step 2 N/A

The Step 2 Section M document is posted on FBO (as of 2 November 2017). This document includes the relative importance of each Factor in Step 2.

Please issue the following section(s) – 12 01 91, 12 01 92, 12 01 50 as referenced on page 19 of Step 1 Section L, 4.3.3(b)(6). These sections are referenced as technical references on Technical Factor 2 – Team Experience for Specialized Scope Elements, specifically for the restoration work required on the Pipe Organ and Historic Wooden Pews.

Section L Step 1 ITO Prqual 13 Oct 17

The Draft Final Technical Specifications have been modified to include these sections and are posted on FBO (as of 2 November 2017).

Please clarify which address Offeror should use if hand delivering proposal

Section L Step 1 ITO Prqual 13 Oct 17

If hand delivering proposal, please deliver to:

772nd Enterprise Sourcing Squadron / PKAA ATTN: Mrs. Sally Kite 3515 S. General McMullen, Building 1, Room San Antonio, TX 78226-2018

FA8903-17-R-0071

Please clarify section 3.5, Organizational Conflicts of Interest Analysis and Mitigation Plan as it is not listed in section 3.0 Volume I -Organization.

Would you like it place between items

(g) and (h) as listed in Table 1/Step 1 Proposal Organization?

Section L Step 1 ITO Prqual 13 Oct 17

5 and 12 Please place the OCI analysis and mitigation plan as it is listed in Step 1/Table 1 'Proposal Organization'.

Please clarify that there is no Technical Factor 3 in Volume II. Both Table 1/Step 1 Proposal Organization and Section 4.3 Volume II Organization do note list a Technical Factor 3. Please verify that there is not Technical Factor 3 to submit

Section L Step 1 ITO Prqual 13 Oct 17

5 and 16 Correct, there is no Technical Factor 3. Factor 3 is Past Performance. Only Factors 1,2, 4, and 5 are Technical Factors.

Please clarify the contradiction in page count as noted in Table 1/Step 1 Proposal Organization, 4.3.1, Standard Proposal Information is limited to 2 pages, but in the description listed in Sections 2.3.6, 2.3.7, and 2.3.8, they state that the documents to be included in the Standard Proposal Information section do not county toward page limitation for their respective volumes.

Section L Step 1 ITO Prqual 13 Oct 17

5, 7, and 8 This is an administrative error that will be corrected by amendment. Step 1/Table 1 for

4.3.1 should be "unlimited" in lieu of "2".

Please clarify or define what PPI database file is as it is referred to in Section 5.2 Volume III Organization, item (i)

Section L Step 1 ITO Prqual 13 Oct 17

This is an administrative error that will be corrected by amendment. Section L, Step 1, Section 5.2 Volume III Organization, item (i) shall be changed to read "Electronic Copy (e.g. CD) of Volume III documentation

FA8903-17-R-0071

Is the pew restoration spec description limited to what is described on plan page IF701 "notes" and Section 01 35 91- 3.6.6.1?

Specification Section 12 01

Pages 1 -10 See also Section 12 01 50 - Refurbishment of Wood Furniture which also cross references Sections 02 42 91 and 05 01 70.

Are the Department of Interior Standards and Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Historic Structures to be followed in regards to existing historic finishes?

N/A N/A Yes.

Section 01 35 91- 3.6.6.1 says "restore pews to like new condition." Per the above referenced standards is the existing patina and/or stain to be retained as a contributing historic element?

Specification Section 12 01

1 through 10

See also Section 12 01 50 - Refurbishment of Wood Furniture; total removal of all patina is not possible. An incompatible finish was added to the pews in the past and is inconsistent. The intent is to remove this incompatible finish and return to more original finish which can still be found on the pews.

Are we to seek and discover existing pristine original, unsoiled, nearly 50 year old pew finish and base our restoration finish samples upon that? If to be like new- do you have the spec description and/or notes of the first finish?

Specification Section 12 01

1 through 10 See Section 12 01 50 - Refurbishment of Wood Furniture

FA8903-17-R-0071

Given the veneer nature of the pew structure do you wish to further define a preferably docile finish treatment for removal of only the soiled surface finishes and/or grease from ground-in hand oils? In particular, avoiding harsh veneer destabilizing and patina damaging removers for wax, soiled finish and water stains? (ie water pressure, chemicals that contain bleach, etc)

Specification Section 12 01

1 through 10 See also Section 12 01 50 - Refurbishment of Wood Furniture

There are a number of areas of hand oils and grease (ie tops of the pew ends) that do not look to be specified for any treatment- is this to be attended to?

Specification Section 12 01

1 through 10 See also Section 12 01 50 - Refurbishment of Wood Furniture

Will you be providing an historic treatment spec description for existing veneer removal, repair and replacement?

Specification Section 12 01

1 through 11 See also Section 12 01 50 - Refurbishment of Wood Furniture

Is there a specified or preferred provider for the pew cushions? Type of foam?

Fabric? Style? And assembly process (ie use of a press, etc)

N/A N/A No. Replacement of pew cushions is not required for the scope of work for this project.

Alternate for Catholic level pews calls for removal and storage only. Would you also like to have "restoration" of these pews (similar to Protestant) provided as an alternate?

N/A N/A No. The Catholic Pews are only to be moved to allow for the removal of the organ in the Catholic Chapel.

FA8903-17-R-0071

Given the considerable expense of storing pews fully assembled over the course of the entire project- does the subcontractor have the option of pew dismantlement and re-assembly or is storage of pews in their fully assembled state a requirement?

Specification Section 12 01

That is considered means and methods. A work plan is required for consideration in 1.5.2 of Section 12 01 50. Dismantlement and re-assembly or storage of pews in the fully assembled state will need to be defined in that plan.

Can you specify the protection/coverings for the exposed pew end expansion bolts?

Specification Section 01 76 00 and Section 02 42 91

Section 01 76 00, Page 1 - 10 and

Section 02 42 91, See also Section 01 76 00 Building Protection and the protection drawings. Section 02 42 91 also requires a work plan (1.3.2) for contractor to propose means and methods.

Do you want a per unit price for possible expansion bolt replacement and floor repair?

N/A N/A Not required as part of this submission.

Can you provide a specific description for the Plan Page IF701 NOTES -05 "Repair metal damage"?

Appendix E, Draft Final Design, 12 Oct 2017

Drawing IF 701 Typically these are scratches on the metal trim from belts and other objects.

Would you like an alternate for work to be done on Catholic Pew Kneelers?

Hydraulic supports, cushions, rubber feet, etc.

N/A N/A No. No options other than those already specified are needed at this time.

What is the anticipated award/NTP/Completion schedule? N/A N/A

The award is anticipated to take place in January 2019, with notice to proceed occuring sometime within 60 days of award. The period of performance for this task order is currently estimated to be 48 months.

Questions and Answers