E1. M0026425Q0202-0001 NMMC Painting Conservation Amendment - Q&A.docx

M0026425Q0202

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

INDUSTRY Q&A

Question 1: In the RFQ document, on page 3, under 2.0 Scope, it states,

a) “This requirement is for professional conservation services for fifteen (15) paintings and frames…” This statement says 15 frames are to be conserved.

Government Response: This should have been for two only, it was noted on the list of works.

b) “This will comprise assessments, conservation treatments to include cleaning, in-painting, and varnishing, stabilization for long-term storage and display, relining of paintings, cleaning, and repairing an antique frame, photography, and a final treatment report for each painting and frame.” This statement says an antique frame (does not specify which frame) is to be conserved and it also says 15 frames are to be conserved.

Government Response: There are two antique frames which was indicated on the list, one by Tolman and the other by Lovell.

c) In Attachment 1, for both 1. Capt Frank Farrell by Tolman and 2. Capt Willard Keith Jr., USMC by Tom Lovell, it states, “(Frame to be conserved).

During the walkthrough on Thursday August 28th, it was said to the group that the frames you want conserved are for the above-mentioned paintings from Attachment 1.

The RFQ, Attachment 1, and information said at the walkthrough seem to contradict each other. All frames have anywhere from minute/minor scratches to major scuffs, dents, flaking gesso, and/or missing ornamentation. To have a fair and competitive bid, prospective bidders need to know if all frames should be conserved, or just the two (2) mentioned in Attachment 1 and at the walkthrough. Should all fifteen (15) frames be conserved or just the frames for Capt Frank Farrell and Capt Willard Keith Jr., USMC?

Government Response: Just the list listed.

Question 2: Do you want the improperly placed backing boards removed, yes or no?

At the walkthrough, it was noted that painting 13. Leaning Forward by Gary Moss and 14. Intermission by Gary Moss have a matboard that has been placed behind the painted canvas, but on top of the stretcher. Both matboards may be acidic. Both matboards are extremely cockled. They have evidence of mold and water staining. We are under the assumption they were placed accordingly for added stability; however, they should be removed due to the above-mentioned issues. This means removing the painted canvases from their stretchers, removing the matboards, cleaning the back of the canvases, and restretching the canvases onto their stretchers, which would mean additional time and costs. To have a fair and competitive bid, this information needs to be clarified and should not be up to the discretion of prospective bidders.

Government Response: YES

Question 3: There is a piece of glass glazing in front of the artwork, Tori by W. Victor Guinness. Do you want the glass removed or do you want it to be reframed with the artwork?

Government Response: Glass to be removed and the work should be reframed with the frame it was originally in.

Question 4: Is it known that any of the paintings to be conserved will require canvas to be relined? If not, is there a possibility that this will be required?

Government Response: This is unknown.

(End of Summary of Changes) image1.wmf