C07_B1051_Att_13_PPI_Answers.pdf
PDF 447 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Bldg. 1051 Replace Main Dry Valves
- Solicitation number
- N0025326Q0013
About this file
This is a Pre-Proposal Inquiry Form for Navy solicitation N0025326Q0013, titled "Bldg. 1051 Replace Main Dry Valves." The document contains twelve inquiries from prospective contractors with corresponding government responses addressing technical clarifications needed for bid preparation. Key clarifications include: the existing dry sprinkler system capacity is estimated at 2,000 gallons (to be verified by a Fire Protection Engineer); wet-sprinkler alarm valves must be replaced with the same generic type, though identical models are not required; contractors must provide shop drawings of riser changes and nitrogen systems, plus Fire Protection Engineer-stamped hydraulic calculations; FAR Clause 52.225-9 (Buy American—Construction Materials) applies to the contract; breathing air system piping outside the mechanical room shall not be replaced, though copper piping may be replaced with stainless steel except for the inlet air pipe to the compressor; and the contract references UFC 3-240-02 Section 1-8 and Washington-state Code (WAC) requirements for breathing air systems.
Additional technical clarifications address equipment specifications: an upgrade from 10 HP to 15 HP is permissible for the air compressor if required to meet the 40 SCFM specification; the estimated existing flow at the filtration unit is 30–35 SCFM maximum based on existing equipment; and the breathing air system design likely factored in standard pressure and SCFM drops across filtration rather than maximum output ratings. The government confirmed that updated valve quantities are specified in Amendment 0001 of the Statement of Work, and pictures of tank storage area lighting cannot be provided. All inquiries and responses were directed to Michelle A. Farrales and Jason B. Gavinski at the Navy contracting office.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation Amendment N0025326Q00130002 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Solicitation Amendment N0025326Q00130001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_13_PPI_Answers.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_12_SOW_Rev_1.pdf | ||
| Solicitation - N0025326Q0013.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_02_Wage_Det.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_04_Guide_Environmental.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_07_Past_Perf.docx | DOCX document | |
| B1051_Att_09_PPI_Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| B1051_Att_06_Schedule_of_Values.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| B1051_Att_08_Bid_Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| B1051_Att_11_OSHA.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_03_Guide_Safety.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_05_Guide_OPSEC.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_12_SOW.pdf | ||
| B1051_Att_10_Safety_Data.docx | DOCX document | |
| B1051_Att_01_Material_Equip.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 17
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY FORM
SOLICITATION #: N0025326Q0013
TITLE: Bldg. 1051 Replace Main Dry Valves
E-mail form to: michelle.a.farrales.civ@us.navy.mil AND jason.b.gavinski.civ@us.navy.mil
Government Responses will be provided in red.
INQUIRIES:
1. Can the capacity (gallons) of the existing dry systems be provided? This will materially affect the correct type of nitrogen system required, if it cannot be provided, is there a job walk scheduled or can one be scheduled?
SOW IV.2.C. gives Technical POC’s estimate for a 2000-gallon capacity, and a requirement for this to be checked by a Fire Protection Engineer. For context: the estimate was calculated from original construction drawings using pipe sizes (using sched. 40 black iron inner diameter actual values) and pipe lengths, then rounded up to the nearest “standard” equipment size.
2. Are the wet-sprinkler alarm valves required to be replaced with the same type of alarm valve, or can these be updated to riser-checks, or shotgun-style riser manifolds with check valves?
Same type, generically speaking. Identical models to the existing valves are not required.
The Government does not intend there to be any alterations to the fire alarm system other than what is strictly necessary to replace the alarm valves.
3. Is there any requirement to produce hydraulic calculations and/or record drawings of these fire sprinkler systems and/or riser detail drawings?
Provide shop drawings of the riser changes, and nitrogen system, and Fire Protection Engineer stamped hydraulic calculations for the existing dry pipe systems.
4. RFP States: "All materials and products provided by the Contractor in the performance of this contract shall be new and manufactured and assembled in the United States of America and shall meet or exceed the manufacturer’s specifications." - Please provide the FAR clause (Buy American) that this contract falls under.
This language is removed from the Statement of Work (SOW) and has officially incorporated FAR Clause 52.225-9 (Buy American—Construction Materials) via Amendment 0001.
5. Is any of the piping for the breathing air system to be replaced (aside from reconfiguration for new equipment)?
No piping of this system outside of the mechanical room shall be replaced.
6. Is there any outlined specialized flushing, degreasing, and certification parameters required to recertify the breathing air system for use?
E-mail form to: michelle.a.farrales.civ@us.navy.mil AND jason.b.gavinski.civ@us.navy.mil
Please reference UFC 3-240-02 Section 1-8, applicable Washington-state Code (WAC) requirements, for breathing air systems. The government has no special, localized requirements for the site.
7. Currently, the piping connecting the system is copper, which has the potential to oxidize over time and build up particulates. Stainless can also withstand aggressive heavy-duty cleaning procedures necessary to pass strict breathing air quality tests such as CGA G-7.1 Grade D Standards.
Would the gov't prefer to replace the piping with stainless steel - consistent with typical applications for Breathing Air Systems the Navy uses?
Replacement of copper pipe with stainless steel is generally permissible (see also response to #5 above), less the inlet air pipe to the air compressor. The inlet air pipe shall generally stay intact except for whatever minor modifications are needed to mate with the new air compressor.
8. Can pictures of the tank storage area lighting be provided?
No.
9. Solicitation N0025326Q0013, Attachment 12 Statement of Work, Section IV.D (Air Compressor) and Section IV (Products) note that source power is 480VAC 3-phase 60Hz on the existing 10 HP-rated circuit, and that required capacity is 40 SCFM at 100 psig, oil-free package. Catalog oil-free packages that deliver 40 SCFM at 100 psig are 15 HP.
A 10 HP oil-free package is approximately 28 to 31 SCFM and will not meet 40 SCFM.
Please confirm whether offerors shall (a) furnish a 10 HP compressor on the existing circuit, (b) furnish a 15 HP compressor that meets 40 SCFM and include upgrade of the existing circuit in the firm-fixed price, or (c) another direction.
All specifications for this equipment were taken from existing, originally constructed equipment and original construction drawings. Basis of design specifications from original construction have not been preserved. An upgrade from 10HP to 15HP is permissible if that is indeed required to meet the SCFM specification of the existing unit.
10. Solicitation N0025326Q0013, Attachment 12 Statement of Work, Section IV.E
(Breathing Air Purifier) requires a package unit rated to deliver OSHA Grade D breathing air at 50 SCFM at 100 psig, with integrated CO, O2, and dew-point monitoring.
Regenerative plant purifiers of that capacity typically require approximately 60 SCFM inlet to deliver 50 SCFM outlet. The compressor in Section IV.D is specified at 40 SCFM. Please confirm the required compressor capacity so the purifier can deliver 50 SCFM Grade D, and whether a circuit upgrade is authorized if a larger compressor is required.
E-mail form to: michelle.a.farrales.civ@us.navy.mil AND jason.b.gavinski.civ@us.navy.mil
See also reply to #9. It is reasonable to conclude that the size of the filter unit was chosen from the standard size filtration units that were available at the time of original construction. The breathing air system design most likely factored in standard pressure and SCFM drops across the filtration unit rather than the system output being rated at the maximums of the filtration unit.
11. Solicitation N0025326Q0013, Attachment 12 Statement of Work, the valve quantities do not match. Section I requires replacement of 1 (qty.) 8-inch wet pipe alarm valve, 3 (qty.)
6-inch wet pipe alarm valves, and 2 (qty.) 6-inch dry pipe alarm valves (no 8-inch dry valve). Section IV.A–B lists 2 (qty.) 6-inch and 1 (qty.) 8-inch wet valves, and 2 (qty.) 6-inch and 1 (qty.) 8-inch dry valves. Section VI.2.C requires replacement of 2 (qty.) 6-inch dry pipe valves, 1 (qty.) 8-inch dry pipe valve, 2 (qty.) 6-inch wet alarm valves, and 1 (qty.) 8-inch wet alarm valve. Please confirm the exact quantity and size of wet pipe alarm valves and dry pipe alarm valves to furnish, including associated drain valves, and whether the 8-inch dry pipe valve is required.
See updated SOW as published in Amendment 0001 for updated quantities.
12. What is the required SCFM at the filtration unit, that will determine the compressor size?
The engineered value is not documented (such documentation has not been preserved), the existing flow at the filtration unit is estimated to be 30–35 SCFM maximum, based on existing equipment.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .