Martin_County_Pre-Proposal_Teleconference.docx

GROUP1-10-R-J009

Regional Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) for Small Business Dredging Projects within the Boundaries of the South Atlantic Division

Martin County Shore Protection Project, Beach Renourishment 2013 Hutchinson Island, Martin County, Florida

PRE-PROPOSAL TELECONFERENCE NOTES

Held on:

November 6, 2012

PARTICIPANTS:

GREAT LAKES DREDGE AND DOCK, LLC

· Lynn Nietfeld

MANSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

· Henry Shore

· Kyle Howell

WEEKS MARING, INC.

· Chuck Broussard

· Keith Lindsey

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT

· Katrina Denson

· Tedra Thompson

· Veronica Taylor

· Shelley Trulock

· Jennifer Tyler

· Paul DeMarco

· James Crawford

· Tamela Kinsey

· Brian Hughes

· Glenn Gannon

DIALOGE:

The pre-proposal teleconference began with Ms. Tedra Thompson of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Jacksonville District introducing herself then conducting a “Roll-Call” of all contractors participating in the pre-proposal teleconference.

Ms. Thompson then opened discussions by asking the first contractor to ask questions one at a time giving the USACE project delivery team (PDT) an opportunity to respond. Once the first contractor had asked all questions or stated they had no additional questions, Ms. Thompson asked the next contractor to proceed with their questions. Ms. Thompson requested that any additional questions not posed during the Pre-Proposal Teleconference be submitted via the Bidder Inquiry System.

CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS & COMMENTS POSED DURING PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE:

1. Regarding timing of the project. Construction will be complete 90 days after NTP. Why won't the contractor have until the end of April to complete the work in accordance with the permit?

There is an estimated time required to complete the project. The fact that there is a window is irrelevant to the performance period. The time to complete the job is based on previous contract history.

2. Allowing more time for project completion up to 30 April 2013, will likely produce more competitive bids.

Comment has been noted and will be taken under consideration.

3. If there is an over run or under run will we adjust the template?

No, the purpose of the template is to show exactly how we want the beach constructed. There will be no adjustment to the template design.

4. Can we extend the pipeline past the corridor as shown on the drawings?

Clarification will be made in subsequent amendment.

5. There seems to be a discrepancy with the elevation on sheet B-02, in the cross section.

Correction will be made in subsequent amendment.

6. Can we extend the pipeline past the corridor as shown on the drawings? Does it extend past 20'? Are any additional corridors being considered?

There are only the 2 pipeline corridors being considered this time, as shown on the drawings. A subsequent amendment will address the need to extend the existing ones, but additional ones will not be added.

7. Question regarding timing. With this being a MATOC when do we expect the NTP?

Standard durations for Award and NTP apply: Award will be made 30 days after the receipt of proposals and NTP will be issued 30 days from Award.

8. Will the amendment delay bid opening?

Possibly; clarification will be provided in subsequent amendment.

9. All contractors in attendance indicated they would like to see the construction duration out to the maximum environmental window of 30 April 2013.

All comments and concerns regarding this matter will be taken into consideration.