19. Questions and Answers for Solicitation.pdf

Questions and Answers for Design Charrette Repair Consolidated Support Bldg. 20245

Question #1

RFP Section 2.8.7.2 requires non-destructive testing of pipe supports to determine the need to replace said supports.

Pipe support methods are prescriptive in NFPA 13 and seismic bracing is required when the facility locations seismic category necessitates such bracing per NFPA 13, therefore, it is unclear how non-destructive testing would inform the decision to replace or add pipe supports. Please clarify the intent of this section. Recommended Action:

Instead of NDT, provide a comprehensive review of existing seismic bracing design and materials with a comparison to current codes, and include correction of seismic bracing, if non-compliant conditions are found.

Answer: This requirement is in error. A visual inspection of the hangars, support, and bracing should be performed in accordance with Section 5.2.3 of NFPA 25. Provide a comprehensive review of existing seismic bracing design and materials with a comparison to current codes, and include correction of seismic bracing, if non-compliant conditions are found. The recommended action is acceptable.

Question #2

RFP Section 2.8.7.2 requires non-destructive testing of sprinkler piping to determine if piping should be replaced.

NFPA 25 requires flushing and internal inspection of existing piping when advanced corrosion is expected or when investigating pipe leaks. The ANSI standard referenced for NDT is not cited anywhere in UFC 3-600-01, NFPA 13, or NFPA 25. Please clarify why the cited ANSI standard is required for this purpose. Recommended Action:

Instead of NDT, require existing piping to be flushed, internally inspected, and hydrostatically tested to determine if piping should be replaced and to confirm it is acceptable to remain in service.

Answer: In accordance with Section 14.3.1 (11) of NFPA 25 the system is being returned to service after an extended shutdown (greater than 1 year). This would require an obstruction investigation. Section 14.3.2 of NFPA 25 requires that systems shall be examined for internal obstructions where conditions exist that could cause obstructed piping. This is the case in this situation as the system meets the condition specified in Section 14.3.1 (11) of NFPA 25.In Section 14.3.2.3 of NFPA 25, the use of Alternative nondestructive examination methods shall be permitted instead of what is specified in 14.3.2.1 of NFPA 25.

Question #3

Is there a proposal page or size limit?

Answer: There is no page limit for the proposals.

Question #4

Will the successful AE team on this Charrette be allowed to pursue the complete design or be a part of a design-build team for the opportunity?

Answer: This cannot be answered at this time.

Question #5

It was stated at the site visit that the intent was for teams to submit both qualifications and price for this solicitation based on revisions provided in Amendment #1. The Standard From 1442 provided in the solicitation indicates that this solicitation is negotiated. Should this form be revised to indicate a Sealed Bid solicitation for a Firm Fixed Price? Please clarify.

Answer: This is not a sealed bid solicitation. However the contract will be considered a firm fixed price. The intent is to award without negotiations.

Question #6

Please confirm that you are expecting both SF330 (AE Qualifications) and Firm Fixed Price “Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown Form” (attachment #4) for this solicitation?

Answer: Yes. The SF330 should be filled out for A&E qualifications. Attachment 4 shall be filled out (one form for each CLIN, 0001 and 0002). This form will not be used for evaluation purposes, only to help the Contracting officer determine price fair and reasonable.

Question #7

What is the anticipated cost magnitude of this solicitation?

Answer: This information is only given for construction projects. Not for A&E solicitations.

Question #8

What is the weighting between AE Qualifications and Price for this solicitation?

Answer: In accordance with the Brooks Act, the government will award to the highest rated technical offeror. If multiple offerors are rated equally, then the CO will award to the lowest price of those offerors.

Question #9

Paragraph 2.4 states a 10 day charrette. The Table for Schedule in Calendar Days states 10 days for Design Charrette Meeting / Site Investigation. Please confirm if we are to expect an actual 10 days’ worth of a charrette process, or does this 10 day period include our site investigation / confirmation of as-builts in addition to a charrette which may be a two to five day process?

Answer: The 10 day period include site investigation/ confirmation of as-builts/meeting with users in addition to the charrette

Question #10

Please define the Re-Programming plan requirement further.

Answer: Re-programing of space effort include analyzing the space and meeting with the user and gathering their needs and space requirements along with any features needed for efficiency of their mission. The programming plan will show the relationship of the new square footages of each space through-out the building and traffic flow to be in accordance with section 2.8.2 and 3.3.3.2 of the SOO. 3.3.3.2. Programing: Provide program space analysis and plan showing space allocation for all organizations in accordance with AFMAN 32-1084, UMD, mission requirements per organization, occupancy loads, and life safety requirements.

Question #11

In the solicitation, it indicates two CLIN items, one for all but the roof design and one for design related to the roof.

The Brooks Acts requires architectural fees to not exceed 6% of the cost of the project. How do we delineate compliance with the Brooks Act in your bid tab form?

Answer: Costs incurred during a design charrette, which is a very preliminary event, are not typically included when calculating the Brooks Act 6% ceiling. At some point after our design charrette, CE will put together the construction IGE/IGCE, at which point, if we proceed to fully designed, sealed plans, the 6% cost limitation will begin to be a factor.

Question #12

It was stated to submit an SF330 and an SF1442 for CLIN Items 001 & 002 by March 2nd, but there is an attachment with the solicitation for a Bid Tab Design Charrette. Is this attachment an example that will be completed after selection? If so, it doesn’t take into account the Brooks Act requirement to not exceed 6% for design fees versus non-design fee.

Answer: No. One bid form should be completed for each CLIN Items 001 & 002.

Question #13

The HVAC system is part of the scope, does KAFB want the exterior windows replace?

Answer: Yes, the exterior windows and storefront windows and doors shall be replaced with thermally broken frames and insulated glass in accordance with UFC 3-101-01 Architecture, most current edition.

Question #14

Is UFC 3-101-01 Architecture applicable?

Answer: Yes, UFC 3-101-01 Architecture, most current edition is applicable. This would fall under Section 3.2.4 of the SOO. 3.2.4. All applicable Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC).