Amendment_7.pdf

N4008019B3016

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Solicitation N40080-19-B-3020, Demolition of 30 Buildings/Structures, Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, Maryland.

a. The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the Inquiry Questions and Responses into the solicitation.

b. The proposal due date is extended to 11 June 2019 at 2:00 PM EST.

C. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged and in effect.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 19

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 04-Jun-2019

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N4008019B3016

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

19-Apr-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

04-Jun-2019

CODE

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

NAS, PATUXENT RIVER

22445 PEARY ROAD, BLDG 504

PATUXENT RIVER MD 20670-5504

N40080 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

July 2011

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:

RESPONSES TO INQUIRIES

PRE‐BID CONFERENCE FOR SOLICITATION NO.: N40080‐19‐B‐3016

PROJECT TITLE: Demolition of 30 Buildings/Structures LOCATION: Naval Air Station, Patuxent River

Q# Page

Section Para # QUESTION

1.

14 C26 A.1 This paragraph states that the Project Manager should be on site during the Government Regular Working Hours. Normally the PM is only required to be available during normal working hours. Please clarify.

Contractor shall be available according to Spec Item C.2.2.b “The Government’s regular (normal) working hours are 07001600, five days per week, Monday through Friday, except observed Federal holidays. Exceptions to the regular hours of operation are detailed in subsequent sections of this PWS.”

Spec Item C.2.6.a.1 is correct.

“The PM or alternate shall be on‐site during the Government's regular working hours and shall be available on‐site within one hour after the Government's regular working hours.”

2.

14 C26 Under Personnel Requirements, there is no mention of a Superintendent or requirements. Will a Superintendent be required to be onsite during all Government regular working hours?

Key Personnel required for this contract are listed under Spec Item C.2.6.

Project Manager (PM) or alternate is equivalent to Superintendent, refer to Spec Item C.2.6.a.1 for clarification.

3.

14 C26 Please clarify how many personnel will be required to be onsite while work is being performed to cover the Supervision, SSHO and QCM.

SSHO qualified personnel, Spec Item C.2.6.a.3, is required to be onsite while work is being performed.

Reference Spec Item C.2.6.a.2 for limitation on QCM requirements.

4.

C26 A4 Are there any certain qualifications needed for the Archeological Consultant?

Archeological Consultant’s qualifications must meet the requirements of the contract and be able to comply with all MDE regulations. The contractor shall comply with Section 106 Consultation the Maryland Historical Trust (State Historic Preservation Officer) for the duration of this contract.

5 Is there any information such as "as‐builts" available for the Catapults?

The Government only has limited drawings as found in JC.3.005, EA‐ 2010, concerning existing dimensions of the catapults.

Does the Government know the thickness of the concrete tops, walls and bottom slabs?

Thicknesses are unknown.

6 37 Location 8011 Pier are there any as builts of the concrete foundation at the end of the pier? It is difficult to know the extent of the concrete removal that is underwater

Government does not have As‐Built drawings for existing piers.

Underwater concrete pier footing removal is not required.

7 37 C.3.2C 1 Please confirm that pier structure piling are only required to be removed to the mud/sediment line and not below

Confirmed; removal to mud/sediment line is only required.

8 37 C3.2.C Gener al

Will any As‐Built drawings of the existing piers and access road to be demolished be provided before bid Time?

Government does not have As‐Built drawings for existing piers and access road. Drawings will not be provide prior to Bid Time.

9 37 C.3.2.C 4 The paragraph stated that the backfill material shall be consistent with surrounding soil. Will seeding be required? If so, please provide the seed type and mixture.

Yes, seeding will be required. Refer to Specification Section C.3.1.p for details.

10 1 of 4 catex ‐2

Summary of Additional Environmental Requirements

Bullet Point

Please confirm that the pier pile pulling moratorium of April 1 ‐ June 30 will be waived if turbidity curtain is utilized and in place.

Work shall not be conduct between April 1 – June 30 regardless of method to remove piles.

11.

C.3.2

A

B2137 Storage Tank What is stored in the Storage Tank?

Refer to Spec Item C.3.2.a (non‐potable water storage)

Is the Storage Tank empty and if not is the Government responsible to empty the Tank?

Unknown. If tank is not empty, the contractor is responsible for emptying contents.

Does Concrete Pad need to be removed?

No

12.

III

B4016 Has the fire alarm and telecom been isolated from Base Wide System?

Any Fire Alarm and telecom communication connected to B4016 will be isolated by the Government before contractor is active on the site.

13.

Under the Base Bid Option has Electrical been removed from all properties, if not are disconnect fees acquired from Semco?

Government will coordinate with SMECO to disconnect at no cost to the Contractor prior to site demo.

Are there any flammable fuel tanks at any of the properties and if so, are they empty?

Refer to Spec Item C.3.2.a.1.I B‐502 is a partial demo and structure to be remove is adjacent to Oxygen Storage Tank that is separated by a blast wall. Oxygen Storage Tank is currently not empty.

If Fuel tanks exist and are not empty who is responsible for disposal of product?

Government anticipates that there are no demo locations that contain fuel in tanks. If discovered by Contractor, then Contractor shall notify Contracting Officer.

14.

Corbin Property Is there asphalt from the House to the roadway that needs to be removed?

Yes, there is approximately 4,000 SF of asphalt from the House to the roadway that shall be removed.

15.

Option 2

Webster Field 8011 Once the Piers are removed is the Contractor responsible for bearing Seawall to match existing conditions?

Not required.

What is the extent of the Power Line removal?

Government will coordinate with SMECO to disconnect at no cost to the Contractor prior to site demo. Contractor will abandoned in place.

16.

ONE

Solicitation

Is the Period of Performance from issuance from Contract Award date or MDE Permit date?

Period of Performance is from Award date.

17. Please provide the new 2019 wage determination.

The most current wage determination has been incorporated into the solicitation.

See Spec Item J‐C.2.003

18. Is the 100,000 gal. tank already abandoned? What type of fuel did it Store?

Non‐potable water and the storage tank is abandoned.

Q# Page # Section Para # QUESTION

19.

30 of

C.3.1

M.1 Testing

Under OSHA 1926.1101(k) Communication of Hazards, (2) Duties of building and facility owners, (i) and (ii), the building owner shall determine presence, location and quantity of asbestos and provide that information to person bidding work. If this information is not provided as required by law, how can a Contractor bid this project and include the unknown at “no additional cost to the government”?

Asbestos locations and quantities are unknown except for results identified in J‐C.2.008.

See spec item C.3.1.m.1 Testing – The contractor shall be responsible for testing any material that the contractor suspects may be Asbestos Containing Materials through a state‐licensed laboratory regardless of any government provided asbestos reports. If the sample of the material in question does yield positive results for containing asbestos, the contractor shall dispose of that material appropriately and in accordance with this specification at no additional cost to the government.

20.

9 of

C.1

The scope indicates that all areas shall be “backfilled with earth.” Is this acceptable for areas located adjacent to and within the active airfield.

Yes. See spec item C.3.1.p with attention to C.3.1.p.4.IV.i for seeding requirements.

There is no issue with earth backfill, although the contractor will need to address concerns for bird strike avoidance with revegetation and bird attraction. Seeding plan for post demolition requires written notification to the Air Operations Office. Grass seed is a bird attractant and the notification will ensure that bird dispersal crews check these areas for concentrations of birds. The design criteria must include either

1) sod for establishment or a planting method to ensure that seed is unavailable to birds or 2) written notice to the Air Operations Office (so that the Wildlife Dispersal Team can prepare for the required bird dispersal activities) if applying seed.

21.

37 of

C3.2 c.

Option 2. Pier 8011. Is the concrete structure under the pier at Webster Field to be included in the pier demo as it is unknown in size and not identified in the solicitation?

Underwater concrete pier footing removal is not required.

22.

18/68

– RFP

Docu ment

C.2.8.c.

4 and C.2.9.p and C.3.1.m all Should the Contractor assume that it will need to perform an asbestos inspection of the buildings and other structures prior to demolition? Based on the RFP, it is apparent that only limited asbestos information is available. For example, Section J‐C.2.008 indicates that only limited asbestos samples are available for the demolition project.

Yes. See spec item C.3.1.m.1. The government has no positive confirmation of ACM except for the result in J‐C.2.008 and must assume PACM due to multiple structure built prior to 1988.

23.

18/68

– RFP

Docu ment

C.2.8.c.

4 and C.2.8.c.

all Will the preparation of specifications and drawings for asbestos and hazardous material abatement be required as part of the demolition plans? If yes, will the specifications need to be compliant with the Unified Facility Criteria (UFC) format?

Yes, UFC format is required.

Specific examples of typical UFC specifications include Environmental Protection, Demolition, Transportation and Disposal of Hazmats, Asbestos Hazard Control, Removal and Disposal of Paint with Lead, Handling of Light Ballasts, Disposal of PCBs, and Cleaning Petroleum Storage Tanks.

24.

26/68

– RFP

Docu ment

C.2.9.f and C.3.1.n and C.3.1.o all Should the Contractor include a hazardous building materials assessment in its proposal?

Yes, your bid shall include cost for a hazardous building materials assessment.

These materials include items such as PCB containing light ballasts, lead based paint, mercury switches, and asbestos containing material. This information is required to develop appropriate disposal quantities for the bid document.

25. Gener al – Hazar dous Mater ials Mana geme nt

All NA The RFP provides clear direction that the Contractor is responsible for the proper management and disposal of hazardous building material such as asbestos, PCB containing light ballasts, lead based paint, mercury switches, above ground and underground storage tank liquids, and pooled water management. What quantities of these materials should be assumed for bidding purposes?

Quantities are unknown.

26.

Site Visit Obser vation s

NA NA A potable drinking water well was observed on the Corbin property. Does the Installation require abandonment of the well as part of this RFP? If yes, is there as‐built information available on the well that provides the type of casing, depth, and equipment within the well?

No. Abandonment of the well is not required.

27. Site Visit Obser vation s

NA NA Potential groundwater monitoring wells were observed across the installation during the site walk. Does the RFP require the abandonment of any groundwater monitoring wells? If yes, is there as‐built information available on the monitoring wells that provides depth, casing, and equipment within the well?

No. Abandonment of groundwater monitoring wells are not required.

28. 26/68

– RFP

Docu ment

C.2.9.i 1 The RFP indicates that Threatened and Endangered Species (T&ES) are not located on the property; however, Section C.2.9.i indicates that the Contractor shall not disturbed T&ES. Should the Contractor perform a formal T&ES survey, or can it assume that T&ES will not be encountered for the purposes of developing a budgetary demolition estimate?

Unless noted in J‐C.3.003, J‐C.3.004, or J‐C.3.005 the government does not anticipate T&ES. If the contractor does witness a T&ES during work then they shall comply with C.2.9.i by notifying the Contracting Officer. No T&ES survey is required.

29. 14/68

– RFP

Docu ment and

CATEX

‐1

C.2.6.a.

1 Section C.2.6.a.4 indicates that the Contractor shall have an archeological consultant on‐site during the demolition of several buildings including 1583, 8060, 8094, 108, 108A, 119, and 205. Other sections of the report reference that coordination with the cultural resources’ manager is only required for Buildings 1583, 8060, and 8094. Please clarify if an archeological consultant is required at the additional locations or only 1583, 8060, and 8094 during subsurface disturbance activities.

A professional archeological consultant is required for monitoring at buildings 1583, 8060, and 8094 during the demolition. Building 1583 is located on the site of the former Cedar Point United Methodist Church cemetery, with the potential for encountering human remains and burial items. Building 8060 is located in an area that has not been previously surveyed, while Building 8094 is located in an area of known high archaeological significance. Limiting ground disturbance at these sites to only the footprint of the existing structures will minimize the chance of archaeological impacts that could delay demolition work and avoid archaeological complications.

Photo documentation and SHPO coordination is required for buildings 108 and 119. Demolition of building 119 (the Electropult) requires HABS/HAER photo‐documentation and recordation by a professional historic preservation photographer. Recordation and documentation must be accomplished according to Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards. Additionally 3‐D imaging of the catapult equipment shall be performed. The contractor shall provide 3 copies of photo sets on archival quality digital media for final consultation with SHPO.

The government will provide approximately 20 drawings of building 108 and the contractor is responsible for providing the reproduction of such drawings for SHPO.

The contractor is required to provide 4 interpretive catapult sign panels and frames for the station’s driving tour. The design of the signs will be provided after award and shall be approximately 3x3

SF.

30. 27/68

– RFP

Docu ment

C.2.9.l 1 ‐ 3 Please provide a copy of all the relevant environmental permits including the facility’s industrial wastewater discharge permit, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) that must be complied with as part of the demolition process.

PWD will provided NPDES permits; however, this does not preclude the contractor from developing, submitting, and obtaining a Maryland Department of Environment permit for Sediment Erosion Control. The contractor is responsible for creating the Stormwater pollution prevention plan for all associated demolition work.

31. 1/10

CATEX

‐1

Bldg And

1 Please provide any water quality information from the basements where water has accumulated so that special waste handling requirements can be evaluated. How was this material handled during previous efforts as mentioned in the RFP?

Water Quality information will not be provided by the government.

Determination of any type(s) of contamination and proper disposal is the responsibility of the contractor.

32. 3 and 4/10

CATEX

‐1

FCDs 1 and 2 For budgetary and scheduling requirements, does the facility anticipate that Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Federal Consistency Determinations (FCDs) will be required for the proposed demolition for any areas in addition to the pier removals?

Yes; CZMA FCD’s will be required for the demolition of all structures, including piers, which are located within 1,000 feet of all tidal waters and adjacent wetlands. MDE’s Coastal Zone Management staff are entitled to 60 day review of FCD’s (and may requests extensions up to 90 days total), but typically provide responses in 45 days or less.

33. 5/10

CATEX

‐1

PCBs 1 The RFP provided some environmental data, such as the asbestos sampling results at select locations. Does the PCB manager have data available for potentially PCB containing material at the locations scheduled for demolition, including the piers, at former transformer pad locations, or electrical equipment locations? If not, what quantities should be assumed for the bid quote?

The government does not anticipate transformers containing PCBs as an earlier project(s) removed all known PCB transformers from the base footprint. The government has no positive confirmation of PCBs exceeding 49 ppm in items/materials at these locations. However, due to the age of the structures, the potential exists for certain items (e.g., hydraulic fluids, electrical switches, light ballasts) to contain PCBs. As stated in the environmental requirements provided with the CATEX reviews, the contractor should demonstrate due diligence in identifying items potentially containing PCBs >49 ppm, and to dispose of these appropriately as hazardous waste. The contractor shall inform NAVFAC if items are found or suspected of containing PCBs.

34. Site Visit Obser vation s

NA NA Due to the historic and current use of the property for military purposes, is an unexploded ordinance survey required or deemed necessary by the facility in areas scheduled for demolition? If yes, will the facility perform this assessment?

No, the survey is not required; however, the government does not anticipate unexploded ordinance at the demolition sites. If suspected ordnance happens to be discovered then the contractor shall stop work immediately and notify the Contracting Officer.

35. RFP

Docu ment

C.2.8.g.

1 The RFP document states that the Contractor is responsible for providing erosion and sediment control plans to MDE in order to obtain a permit.

MDE requires a topographic survey in order to obtain an erosion and sediment control permit. Will the installation provide the Contractor with a topographic survey or will the Contractor be responsible for performing the topographic survey?

The contractors are responsible for performing their own topographic survey. Upon request (after award) the Government will provide the latest layers from GRX to support a topographic survey. Please contact Tracy Maningas at PWD to coordinate this effort.

36. RFP

Docu ment

NA NA Will the Contractor be responsible for obtaining a Boundary Survey for the installation or is this information available?

No, the contractor is not responsible for obtaining a Boundary Survey as 29 of the 30 demolition sites are within the base fence line. The Corbin Property is the only exception and requires a Boundary Survey.

37. Site Visit Obser vation s

Buildin g

Will the exterior containment concrete vault for Building 1583 need to be demolished?

Yes, vault is associated with the building.

38. NA NA Are technical specifications, including but not limited to Earthwork, Site Demolition, and Support of Excavation, required to be prepared and submitted for review?

Yes, these examples of technical specifications shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer and the Contracting Officer Representative for review.

39. 22/68

– RFP

Docu ment

C.2.8.G .3

1 This section states that if the project disturbs less than 5,000 square feet, best management practices are required but permits may not be required.

It also states a permit may be required if the disturbance is greater than 5,000 square feet. Section B.1 indicates that 61,314 square feet will be disturbed for the demolition of all structures. For the purposes of permitting, will the land disturbance for each individual structure or the overall disturbance be used? This could have large implications for permitting.

Both the Stormwater/sediment and Erosion plan and the NPDES permit are based on the total disturbance of the project. Since the total disturbance is over an acre (approx. 43,500 square feet) then the project will need both a plan and permit approval. Refer to Inquiry #30 response for additional information.

40. Site Visit Obser vation s

During the Project Overview during the 4/30/2019 Site Visit, it was discussed that erosion and sediment control permits would be required but stormwater management would not. However, under the Soil Disturbance section in CATEX‐1, it is mentioned that Stormwater Management Plans must be approved by MDE. Please confirm if Stormwater Management Permits from MDE will be required.

No Stormwater Management Plan is required; however, a signed (contact Tracy Maningas at PWD to coordinate) stormwater waiver is to accompany your SEC submission to MDE.

Maryland has combined both the Stormwater plan and the Sediment and Erosion Control plan into a single plan approval process.

Refer to Inquiry Response #30 for additional information.

41. 17/68

Docu ment

C.2.8.C.

1 We understand a demolition plan shall be provided by the Contractor per section C.2.8.C.1. Please verify if site demolition drawings showing the extents of objects to be demolished, utility demolition, construction staging, fencing locations, limits of disturbance, tree protection, etc. will be required as part of this plan.

Yes, the Demo plan should contain the utility demo, extent of objects demolished, construction staging, fencing, limits of disturbance, tree protection. It will be reviewed by MDE and notification will be sent if additional requirements are needed.

42. 17/68

Docu ment

C.2.8.C.

1 This section of the RFP states that a Demolition Plan “shall be reviewed and signed by the Contractor’s Registered Professional Engineer who had also considered engineering, lead, and asbestos surveys of the buildings/structures.” Please clarify if this requires the Contractor’s Registered Professional Engineer to provide Hazmat surveys for all buildings to be demolished in order to satisfy this requirement.

Yes, Contractor’s Registered Professional Engineer shall provide Hazmat surveys for all buildings.

43. Site Visit Obser vation s

Buildin g

NA A heating oil exhaust pipe was observed on the side of the building, but a heating oil tank was not observed. Is there a heating oil tank in the basement (AST) or is there an underground storage tank outside the building that will need to be properly abandoned?

No, the contractor will not be responsible for the demolition of an AST or UST in this area. There are no records of either an AST or UST currently on this site.

No, there is no heating oil tank in the basement.

The basement contains 2 huge coal fired furnaces, 2 water expansion tanks, 1 ‐ 80‐gallon non‐commercial water heater and 1 gas burner in the back room.

44. 2 of

B.11 We’re requesting a 2 nd site visit in order to gain access to several of the buildings. In particular B439 mech/elec room (basement), B502 (viewed only from the fence line), B1583 interior, B1650 interior, Corbin Property interior.

No, there will not be a second site visit prior to award.

45. 27 of

C.2.9 p Asbestos Containing Material. Please confirm if ACM is encountered during the work or after the survey, it will be treated as a differing site condition. The ACM provided with the solicitation survey is only for B334, B8094 & B6026 with ACM identified at B6026 only, though without estimated quantities. No survey was provided for the other structures.

ACM encountered during the demolition phase of this contract will NOT be treated as differing site condition. The contractor shall plan accordingly using prior work experience to estimate a reasonable quantity and cost given the type and age of structures. See spec item C.3.1.m.1 for contractor responsibilities.

46. 35 of

C.3.2.a Base Option

3 Hazardous Materials Removal. This paragraph states in part “Contractor will be required to perform testing for ACM/Lead Paint and abatement if necessary.” We cannot estimate any hazardous material removal until a survey is done. Please confirm any hazardous material discovered post‐ award via the contractual survey will be treated as a differing site condition and a potential change order will be negotiated for any hazardous material abatement. This inquiry is addressed to structures in Option 1 and Option 2 as well.

ACM/Lead Paint encountered during the demolition phase of this contract will NOT be treated as differing site condition. The contractor shall plan accordingly using prior work experience to estimate a reasonable quantity and cost given the type and age of structures. See spec item C.3.1.m.1 for contractor responsibilities.

47. 35 of

C.3.2.B Option

Regarding the catapult, what depth should we plan to excavate to remove the catapult structures?

Catapults at 108/108A and 119 are below ground structures that have an estimated depth of 20FT – 25FT. Catapult at 161 is located under an active taxiway/runway that will not require excavation of load bearing structures.

Refer to Spec C.3.2.b.2 for more detailed information.

48. B‐334 There is a flight line perimeter fence attached to the corners of the building. Removal of the building will leave a gap in the fence line. Are we to install fencing so the flight line fencing is continuous once the building is removed? Also the flight line fence is at two different heights at this location. If we’re to provide new fencing, please provide specifications on type, height, etc.

No, the contractor is not responsible for installing additional flight line fencing at this location.

49. Varies Building s

Various buildings appear to contain abandoned materials, such as Building 1650, buildings at the day camp, and Building 439. Will the government remove these materials prior to demo, or should we plan to dispose of the materials as part of the demolition? Note we were not given access to B1650, but we were able to partially see through a small slat in the OH door.

Contractor shall dispose of all material within the footprint of the demolition site. Contractor and Government coordination will occur prior to site demolition to discuss details. If any irregularities are found, then such items shall be brought to the Contracting Officer’s attention.

50. J‐ C.3.007

Attachment J‐C.3.007 Building_Floor_Plans.pdf identifies the structure foot print or square footage. Height is not identified. Are there as‐built documents available to enable the contractor to estimate volume of removal?

All available drawings have been provided and cross‐sectional drawings showing the height of the structures is not available. All structures are standard single level structures except for 502, 2317 (Non‐potable Water Tank), Corbin property, 205 as evident in JC.3.006 Demo Photos. Catapults 108/108A, 119, and 161 are single level structures that are subterranean.

51. 34 of

C.3.2.a Base Option

1.1 Bldg. 502. We are tasked with the removal of the lean‐to only. It’s difficult from the description, photos and provided floor plan to determine the extent of removal and associated repairs. Can you provide more detail as to where the demolition ends, what repairs are required, what building systems may be impacted, etc.?

Basic info about the proposed demo of the lean to on B502 (Oxygen shop).

Square feet = 40 x 25 to 30 = approximately 1,000 ‐1,200 SF footprint.

Roof is wood purlins, supported on 2 ‐ 40 foot steel beams.

Walls are masonry, with masonry columns supporting the two steel beams.

Condition ‐ poor Wide cracks exist in the masonry sidewalls. The cracks appear to be active and growing. They have compromised the ability of the structure to support the code‐required loads, particularly lateral loads from wind.

Demolition will require unusual care to avoid disturbing the existing liquid oxygen tank and piping. An existing blast protection wall between the lean to and the oxygen tank makes this less difficult.

Demolition should leave existing 2 story concrete structure and cantilever roof intact but remove all the masonry and steel that were added for the lean to.

(End of Summary of Changes)