Responses_to_Questions_-_Roof_Replacement_-_20_May_2015.pdf

Gov Response to RFIs 20 May 2015 Page 1

Responses to Questions Re‐Roof West Half of Defense Microelectronics Activity (DMEA) Building 1

Solicitation No. HQ0727‐15‐R‐0008 / SOW No. 15‐5C2

Question Answer

1. Please specify the current roof assembly.

What are the layers of product currently on the roof? Is a drawing available?

Please see the attached Roof Detail photo.

We believe the roof is made of 2 layers of built‐up roofing, 1 single layer of rigid insulation and 10.5” concrete roof. Upon award, this can be verified with a core sample. See solicitation

pg. 7, para. 3.4.1 (4).

2. How can CTRs dispose of trash? Should they plan to construct a trash chute over the fence?

Is another trash disposal method preferred or required? To what side of the roof can trash be removed?

In accordance with solicitation pg. 8, para. 3.4.4, the Offeror will be allocated a staging area for a dumpster in the center lot (between DMEA buildings 1 and 2). Due to the equipment surrounding the building, use of a trash chute is the preferred method for removing debris from the roof. If a trash chute is the method used, the Offeror will need to construct the chute on the west side of the roof to get materials to their dumpster.

3. Should the expansion joint between the two (2) roof halves be replaced? Alternatively, can the existing expansion joint be reused?

Yes, the expansion joint between the 2 halves of the roof should be replaced.

4. Hornets/yellow jackets are present on the roof. Is there an active nest on the roof?

Will this be removed by the Gov prior to beginning work?

If a nest is discovered, DMEA will have it removed by a professional pest control company.

5. The specifications appear to call for recovering the existing roof with a mechanically attached single ply roof system;

however, the substrate does not lend itself to that method of attachment since it appears to be concrete and full of rebar and conduit. This should be a fully adhered system since Offerors cannot see the substrate they would be fastening into; is this correct?

Adhered roofing is not an option because of the vapors it would produce during application. These vapors would impact clean room operations below and would set off evacuation alarms.

The east half of the roof has mechanically adhered membrane roofing – so it has been done already.

The few conduits in the roof are below the first layer of rebar and are therefore protected from the concrete nails used to attach the new membrane.

See solicitation pg. 7, para. 3.4.1(1)(a) & 3.4.1(2).

6. The north wall is covered with electrical conduit ‐ this needs to be removed or at least loosened from the wall in order to roof the wall correctly. This should be done by the “owner” due to the assumed sensitivity of the building. Will the Government complete this?

In accordance with solicitation pg. 8, para. 3.4.1(8), the Offeror will be responsible for any lifting of equipment. In accordance with solicitation pg. 9, para. 4.1, work shall be done by a licensed electrical Contractor.

Gov Response to RFIs 20 May 2015 Page 2

Question Answer

7. There are a number of abandoned penetrations (pipes and curbs) on the roof. Can these be eliminated during the re‐ roofing process?

These need to be addressed on a case‐by‐case basis. If the abandoned curbing is wood, the Contractor can remove it;

however, some of the curbs are concrete and are not worth the effort to remove. Piping (chilled/hot water) will likely need to remain due to system impacts required for a shutdown to remove.

8. There are a number of mechanical platforms and curbs that are below the standard 8 inch height above the finished roof. Are the existing heights acceptable to the manufacturer, or should these be raised (at considerable cost)?

It is not the intent of this project to lift and raise the existing curbs and platforms. The Contractor should work with their roofing system manufacturer rep to determine the best method to reroof these areas without raising the existing curbs and platforms.

9. Instruction to Offerors section 4.0 does not include a requirement to provide a Technical Narrative; however, section 5.0, item 1(a) lists a Technical Narrative / Roofing Installation Plan as an evaluation criteria for describing roofing means and methods.

Are Offerors required to submit a technical narrative with the proposal response?

Yes, Offerors must submit a Technical Narrative / Roofing Installation Plan as part of their proposal submission.

The solicitation Instructions to Offerors, section 4.0, will be amended to include the proposal submittal requirement.

10. May I submit a proposal if I missed the mandatory site visit? While the site visit is described as mandatory in both the FBO posting and solicitation, the Government cannot prevent potential Offerors from submitting a proposal in response to the solicitation.

Potential Offerors have been given an opportunity to view the site and all conditions that could affect the work or cost of performance. A low Offeror who has not inspected the site cannot later stop work or request additional funds to complete the work by contending that it is encountering, or will encounter, problems at the site, if such problems or additional costs could have been mitigated by attending the pre‐proposal conference and site visit.

The solicitation will be amended to add attendance at the pre‐ proposal conference and site visit as an evaluation factor.

An additional pre‐proposal conference and site visit will not be conducted.