Amendment 0003 PPI Responses.pdf

Gov't Tracking#

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

Please confirm that “CLIN 0003 and 0004 can be exercised within 910 days of contract award in accordance with 52.217‐7” should state “CLIN 0004 and 0005 can be exercised within 910 days of contract award in accordance with 52.217‐7” If so, please provide an updated schedule of prices.

See Amendment 0001 001

Attachment K was provided but was not included in the solicitation instructions. Please advise.

To be addressed in future amendment

Attachment L was provided but was not included in the solicitation instructions. Please advise.

To be addressed in future amendment

Page 12 of the solicitation states: Small Business Subcontracting Plan. In accordance with FAR 19.703, large businesses are required to submit an acceptable small business subcontracting plan that meets the requirements of FAR 19.704 prior to award utilizing the format provided in Attachment C. The subcontracting plan (if applicable) shall be submitted electronically via email to emily.m.easterday.civ@us.navy.mil with a copy to jodus.d.hortin.civ@us.navy.mil no later than 2:00 pm PST two business days after the due date for submitting the proposal. Please confirm this referenced due date for the subcontracting plan would be Wednesday, September 6, 2023 with the Labor Day holiday on Monday, September 4, 2023.

Confirmed 001

Page 13 Price Instructions (a) Price instructions goes from item (i) to item (iii). Please clarify if there is missing content that should be item (ii) or if that item was just inadvertently missed.

No missing content 001

Page 13 Price Instructions There is no mention of the price schedule in the price instructions. Should this be included immediately after the

SF1442?

Price schedule is on page 3‐4 of the solicitation 001

Page 13 Price Instructions (iv) Completed Representations and Certifications, including the supplemental certifications provided in Section 00600 of the solicitation, are current and posted in SAM; There is no Section 00600 provided in the solicitation, can you please provide that via amendment?

See Amendment 0001 001

Solicitation Page 15 of 77 Section 00 21 16 B. Evaluation Factors for Award

(b) Technical Factors: (1) Factor 1 – Corporate Experience:

Complexity: 1st paragraph, 2nd Sentence ‐ “Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be substantially complete (owner can occupy facility) within ten (10) years preceding the original date of issuance of this solicitation”.

Question: An Offeror is required to demonstrate experience with the construction of 50,000 barrel fuel tanks on a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 5 construction projects in order to be deemed technically acceptable for this project. Furthermore, these construction projects are required to be no older than ten (10) years. 50,000 barrel tanks are not constructed frequently in this industry. We request that the timeframe for recent and relevant construction projects be extended from ten (10) years to twelve (12) years. Please advise as soon as possible if this is acceptable.

12 years is acceptable. 001

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

Solicitation Page 15 of 77 Section 00 21 16 B. Evaluation Factors for Award

(b) Technical Factors: (1) Factor 1 – Corporate Experience:

Scope: 2nd Paragraph – “Demolition and removal of underground fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 35,000 barrels”.

Question: Demolition and removal of underground fuel storage tanks that are 35,000 barrels or larger are very uncommon in this industry. We request the tank demolition requirement be modified slightly per one for the two options presented below:

Option 1: Demolition and removal of underground or aboveground fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 35,000 barrels

OR

Option 2: Demolition and removal of underground fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 14,000 barrels

Please advise if this modification is acceptable as soon as possible

No change 001

(Pg 15 of Solicitation)‐ Section 00 21 16 ‐ Instructions to Proposers, paragraph B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, Factor 1 Corporate Experience, Scope Element No. 1 requires Construction of above ground fuel storage facilities with transfer pipelines for liquid fuel with minimum individual tank storage volume (capacity) of 50,000 barrels of fuel storage. The 50,000‐barrel size criteria is not common and will significantly limit competition on this project.

We request the Government consider reducing the tank fuel storage size criteria from 50,000 barrels to 40,000 barrels to allow greater competition as there have been very few bulk fuels projects constructed over the past 10 years requiring greater than 40,000‐barrel fuel storage tanks. Additionally, the actual design and construction materials/methods to construct a 40,000‐barrel tank are nearly identical to that of a 50,000‐barrel tank.

No change 001

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

(Pg 15 of Solicitation) ‐ Section 00 21 16 ‐ Instructions to Proposers, paragraph B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, Factor 1 Corporate Experience states “Every project shall meet at least one scope element, and the corresponding minimum size of 50,000 barrels of fuel storage. Failure to meet all of the criteria will result in an unacceptable rating” Note, there are 5 scope elements identified and scope elements 2, 4 and 5 do not specify a minimum size criterion (i.e. tank capacity):

1) Construction of above ground fuel storage facilities with transfer pipelines for liquid fuel with minimum individual tank storage volume (capacity) of 50,000 barrels of fuel storage.

2) Construction of fuel tank secondary containment structures.

3) Demolition and removal of underground fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 35,000 barrels.

4) Cathodic protection of field erected aboveground tanks and associated constructed fuel systems.

5) Automatic Tank Gauging (ATG) & Automatic Fuel Handling Equipment (AFHE) System installation with instrumentation and controls integration. Please confirm that scope elements 2, 4 and 5 do not have corresponding minimum size requirements (i.e. tank capacity).

Confirmed.

RFP page 15 of 77, please delete:

"Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates its experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. The Government will only review five (5) construction projects. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) will not be considered. Every project shall meet at least one scope element, and the corresponding minimum size of 50,000 barrels of fuel storage.

Failure to meet all of the criteria will result in an unacceptable rating".

Replace with:

"Submit a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of five (5) construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates its experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. The Government will only review five (5) construction projects. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) will not be considered. Every project shall meet at least one scope element. At least two (2) construction projects shall meet the minimum size of 50,000 barrels of fuel storage. Failure to meet all of the criteria will result in an unacceptable rating".

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS Page 10 Pre‐Proposal Inquiries. Offerors who determine that the technical and/or contractual requirements of this RFP require clarification shall submit all questions in writing. The pre‐proposal inquiry format is provided as Attachment A, Pre Proposal Inquiry Form. Pre‐Proposal Inquiries shall be submitted via email to Emily.m.easterday.civ@us.navy.mil with a copy to jodus.d.hortin.civ@us.navy.mil. Pre proposal inquiries will be accepted up to 7 days prior to solicitation due date unless specified otherwise via amendment. Please clarify if it is 7 business days or calendar days, thank you!

It is calendar days. 001

The dwg shows (2) each 6” Double Block and Bleed (DBB) plug valves at the West pier valve pit and (1) DBB valve at Valve Pit 6. Is the Contractor responsible for providing these (3) 6” DBB valves?

The plan MF801 will be updated to eliminate the connection to the oily waste water in the West Pier valve pit. The Double Block and Bleed valve in Valve Pit 6 was installed in Phase 1. Contractor is not required to provide the three 6‐ inch DBB plug valves as currently shown.

Spec 33 52 43.14, paragraph 2.2.1.1, “Bodies, Bonnets, and Covers” The Spec requires internally electroless nickel plated (ENP) cast steel (WCB)/(LCB) or cast stainless steel (ASTM A743) control valves. Internally electroless nickel plated Ductile Iron control valves were allowed on phase 1. The contract requires ANSI Class 150# 14” control valves. 14” cast steel and cast stainless steel control valves are extremely expensive and have a long lead time due to the fact they are not regularly manufactured. We are requesting that ENP ductile iron be allowed for Phase 2 due to cost and availability of cast steel and cast stainless steel. 14” ENP ductile iron control valves are more readily available and cost less due to the amount of volume that have been manufactured.

The latest revision Change 1 of 33 52 43.14 dated 02/21 removed ductile iron for control valve body material. Please provide one of the options as listed in the specification for this project.

In light of the complexity of the project, and in the interest of providing the Government with the most comprehensive and cost‐effective proposal possible, we respectfully request a three week postponement of the bid date.

See Amendment #0002 003

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

Box 10 of Solicitation N4425523R1503 tells us: “This procurement is an unrestricted full and open competition. In accordance with FAR Part 19.703 Large Businesses must submit an acceptable subcontracting plan”. Section 00 21 16, Clause 52.219‐4, Pages 2 1& 22 of 77, advises of the 10% HUB Zone preference for the project.

Q. The two instructions contradict one another. How can a Large Business without a HUB Zone JV partner possibly compete against an essentially SB in the form a HUB Zone/LB JV? Please clarify.

Box 10 of Solicitation N4425523R1503 tells us: “This procurement is an unrestricted full and open competition. In accordance with FAR Part 19.703 Large Businesses must submit an acceptable subcontracting plan”. Section 00 21 16, Clause 52.219‐4, Pages 21 & 22 of 77, advises of the 10% HUB Zone preference for the project. Q. In the absence of a Large Business forming a JV with a HUB Zone company; is it possible to subcontract 40% of the construction to HUB Zone Company(s) under a Large Business and still receive the 10% HUB Zone preference?

Section 00 21 16, Clause 52.219‐4, Page 22 of 77, Paragraph (2) states: “The factor of 10 percent shall be applied on a line item basis or to any group of items on which award may be made. Other evaluation factors described in the solicitation shall be applied before application of the factor”. Q. What evaluation factors mentioned in the second sentence will be applied before application of the 10% factor? Could these factors impact the application of the 10%?

Please review.

(Pg 15 of Solicitation)‐ Section 00 21 16 ‐ Instructions to Proposers, B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, Corporate Experience, paragraph (2)(b)(1)(a) as revised per Amendment 1, effectively excludes otherwise qualified contractors by requiring at least two (2) construction projects that meet the minimum size of 50,000 barrels of fuel storage.

Would the Government alternatively accept corporate experience of a key subcontractor under a partnership agreement or “Contractor Team Arrangement” as defined in FAR 9.601 where “A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.”?

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

(Pg 15 of Solicitation)‐ Section 00 21 16 ‐ Instructions to Proposers, B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, Corporate Experience, paragraph (2)(b)(1)(a) ‐ Joint Venture, Partnership, or Mentor Protégé.

Please confirm that the Government will accept the experience of a partnership member/subcontractor if the subcontractor was not the prime contractor on the project experience it submits for Section B. Evaluation Factors for Award, Factor 1 Experience. e.g. partnership member/subcontractor has experience designing/fabricating/erecting fuel storage tanks that meet the experience requirements of factor 1 for a project in which it performed as a subcontractor but was not the prime contractor.

Specification section 335755, 2.2.2 states that the fuel handling system must be furnished by a single systems supplier. Since this is Phase 2 of a 3 phase project, phases 2 and 3 will need to use the same systems supplier selected for phase 1. Please provide the contact information for the Phase 1 fuel system supplier.

The Phase 1 systems supplier is Bay & Associates. 003

Please confirm that there are no “Controlled Unclassified Information” (CUI) within the plans and specifications for this solicitation.

Proprietary products. Please identify which items are required from a proprietary manufacturer or specific model on this project. If there are any, please provide the Justification and Approval documentation for this and identify three viable manufacturers for each of the identified proprietary items for the contractors to contact to receive competitive quotations.

1. Limitorque Actuators

2. Enraf 954 Servo

3. Enraf VITO Probe (Temperature/Water Level)

4. Enraf SmartView (Tank Side Indicator)

At the bottom right of Drawing CS408, there appears to be a pipe support that is not identified. This would be located below PS408.1 and PS407.6 on Drawing CS407. Please confirm if this is an existing pipe support or if a new pipe support is required. If a new pipe support is required, please identify what type of pipe support and footing will be used and update the schedule on Drawing MF‐704.

The structure referenced is not a Pipe Support and is Pipe Headwall 3 shown on S‐522. PS407.6 is built into Pipe Headwall 3 as shown on S‐522. The location of PS407.6 shown on CS407 provides location for Pipe Headwall 3.

We are unable to locate pipe support 407‐7 and shown on the pipe support schedule on MF704. Please identify the location of this pipe support in the CS drawings.

PS 407‐7 referenced on MF407 is labeled as CTS 407 on Sheet CS407. 003

026 Please confirm the catch basins shown on Drawings CS404, CS407, and CS408 are all existing.

Sheets CS404, CS407, and CS408 are FOUNDATION LOCATION PLANS and the intent of showing Catch Basins is for reference only. See VF Sheets for Existing Conditions Plans and CG Sheets for Grading and Drainage Design. For clarity, the catch basins shown in the referenced plans are not existing.

Will a concrete manifold pad be required in this phase of construction for future tanks 805 and 806? Drawings MF521 and MF522 say future work, but piping is in this current phase of construction. Please confirm.

Manifold pads have been provided for future Tanks 805 and 806 as part of Phase 1 construction. 003

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

028 The drawings issued for pages B601 to B608 are not legible. Please provide revised drawings.

Please refer to the boring logs in the Phase 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report if you are having difficulty reading the referenced boring logs on the "B" series drawing sheets.

Was there a geotechnical report completed for this project? If so, could you provide us a copy of this report? In specification Section 02 65 00 Part 1.3 there is reference to Geotechnical Engineering Report Phase 2 completed by September 29, 2022.

Yes, please refer to the attached Phase 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report dated September 29, 2022. 003

030 Can you provide an as‐built drawing of the existing tanks #27 and #34?

Specific As Built Drawings for these tanks are not available. Standard design drawings for the underground tanks are shown in pdf files PPI 030 24535 50,000 Bl Floor Slab and PPI 030 24667 50,000 Bl Structural Details

Are there any schedule restraints on the removal of the existing Concrete Barriers, access roadway, and 12‐inch fire line as shown on Drawings CD101, CD104, and CD105? This work will be part of our critical path.

No current constraints. Similar to the entire project, project to be coordinated through the KO and Manchester Fuel Depot operations and work on site.

032 Are there any schedule restraints on getting access to stockpile areas shown on CD102, CD105, and CD106? No current constraints. Similar to the entire project, project to be coordinated through the KO and Manchester Fuel Depot operations.

On Drawing CG301 under tank TK 803 detail C1, you show a note “Bottom of Tank 26 (demolished in Phase 1).” You also show an approximate soil replacement zone to the underside of the tank. Our question is, has the soil replacement zone material already been placed under Phase 1? You also show a note Tank 26 backfill (Phase 1) in that same detail. Has this material also already been placed? Are we to excavate the soil replacement zone material under tank 803 and provide new gravel borrow per WSDOT standards?

This material under TK 803 has not already been placed. Contractor shall overexcavate in place material and replace with suitable gravel borrow material described in Keyed Note 1.

On Drawing C‐103, Note #2, it states: “Government will determine the price of the tree to be removed using the current state of Washington Stumpage Tables. The contractor shall purchase the tree from the government at the stated value.” Could you please provide us with the value of the trees that we are to purchase from the government for this project?

Section 33 56 21.17, Paragraph 3.5.4.3, Hydrostatic Test and Settlement, requires us to fill the tanks to total capacity.

The plans define these tanks as 125,000‐barrel tanks, yet the physical size of these tanks exceed this quantity. Please define to what capacity we are to hydro‐test these tanks. Unless told otherwise, we are going to assume 125,000‐ barrel capacity tests meet the requirements.

Specification 33 56 21.17 states "Tank shall be filled with water to the high‐high alarm liquid level of the tank. " 003

If there is contaminated soil found on site, could we re‐use this soil to fill the void created by the removal of the existing tanks on site?

No. 003

037 Will onsite testing for contaminated soil be required while we perform the excavations around the existing tanks? Yes. 003

On Drawing CG505, Note 1B, you state: “Structural Fill shall be onsite soils meeting requirements of common borrow conforming to WSDOT Standard Specifications Section 9‐03.14 (1).” Can you tell us if onsite soil meets the WSDOT specifications? Without a soil report we have no way of knowing if they do.

Please refer to the attached Phase 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report dated September 29, 2022. 003

At the completion of the hydrostatic test of the tanks, where are we to dispose of this water? Is there a charge for disposing of this water? At what flow rate can we dispose of this water?

Please see Revised Bid Schedule added SubCLIN provided in Amendment 0003. There is no discharge available at Manchester Fuel Depot or the city of Manchester. Contractor shall transport and dispose of water off site in accordance with state and Federal regulations.

In the prevailing wage rate schedule provided to us there is not a “Pipe Fitter” or “Pipe Welder” labor rate provided.

Please provide these wage rates or let us know what we are supposed to use for wage rates for these workers.

On Drawings CD101 to CD106 you provide a legend showing “Limits of Disturbance.” Are we to provide a fence at these locations? If so, what type of fence are you requiring us to provide?

The intent of the Limits of Disturbance shown is not for locating any sort of construction fencing. 003

On Drawing CD501 you require us to grout‐fill the existing tunnel tile drain system. Please provide the layout of the existing system or define how many linear feet of tile drain we are supposed to assume exists below the tanks.

The tile drains in question run along the circumference of the tank foundation within a few feet of the existing tank foundation. Tile drains run along both sides of the existing tank lateral tunnels to main tunnel run with tile drains to remain.

On Drawing CD501 you require us to disconnect lateral tunnel drains for the main line tunnel drains. Unless told otherwise, we are going to assume this is one connection per tank site.

There are 2 tile drain connections for each tank to be demolished that require disconnecting. 003

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

On Drawing CD‐501, Note 5, it states: “All drain holes shall be drilled in the bottom slab equally spaced (8’‐10’ spacing).” Will the contractor be allowed to punch these holes with hydraulic demolition equipment, or must they be core‐drilled?

Holes can be punched using hydraulic demolition equipment. 003

Drawing GI003 notes: “Any damage to roads and pavements‐to‐remail due to construction equipment or traffic shall be repaired to restore the roads and pavements to their original condition to the satisfaction of the contracting office.” Is it the intent of the government to re‐pave the access road on base after this project is complete?

No. 003

Drawing GI003 notes: “Any damage to roads and pavements‐to‐remail due to construction equipment or traffic shall be repaired to restore the roads and pavements to their original condition to the satisfaction of the contracting office.” Unless told otherwise, we are going to assume the existing roads are designed to carry truck traffic loads and that if we are in compliance with roadway load restrictions then any damage to roadway surfaces would be considered a change to the contract.

Areas within or adjacent to Limits of Disturbance that are damaged as a result of the contractors equipment should be restored to it's orignal conditions.

Does the Manchester base employ a private utility company to perform work at the site? Is there any component of the work on this contract that will be performed by the base private utility company? Is the awarded contractor expected to compensate the private utility company for any work on this contract? What value should be carried in the estimate by the contractors as payment for the private utility work? If none is provided, we expect for bidding purposes the Navy will cover payment directly to the private utility company.

Follow the outage process. Government will coordinate outages with Navy owned utilities. 003

Section 02 65 00, Underground Storage Tank Removal, Paragraph 1.5.5 Permits and Licenses. What permits has the government obtained for this project? Has the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) been contacted to request a list of additional permits that are necessary for the contractor to provide? We are concerned, on an already tight construction schedule, about any added critical path to the contract duration to process any permits. More importantly, what permit(s) remain for the contractor(s) to obtain for the contaminated soil excavation/handling and UST removal on this project?

1. VEHICLE

2. AIR POLLUTION GENERATING EQUIPMENT/PRECONSTRUCTION AIR PERMITS

3. EXCAVATION

4. CONFINED SPACE ENTRY

5. HOT WORK PERMIT

6. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

7. HAZARDOUS WASTE

8. CONFINED SPACES

9. CRANE ACCESS

10. ARC FLASH

11. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)

12. TANK CLOSURE NOTIFICATION (WASHINGTON DEPT OF ECOLOGY)

13. NOISE PERMIT

14. LARGE ENGINE AIR PERMIT

15. KITSAP COUNTY TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN/TRUCK QUEUING

16. NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)

17. EPA’S CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT (CGP)

In addition to those identified above, contractor shall obtain all permits required to comply with local, State, and Federal regulations.

Due to the time required to solicit pricing from multiple tiers of vendors and subcontractors, in order to timely submit a competitive proposal we are requesting a 30‐day extension of the bid date. This will give vendors, including small businesses, the time needed to respond effectively.

See Amendment #0002 003

On Drawing CG505 Reinforced Soil Slope, how do we determine the “L” distance for each of these RSS slope installations?

See Note 4 on CG505. "PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE EQUAL TO THE SLOPE HEIGHT (H) AND A VERTICAL SPACING OF 36 INCHES." Primary Reinforcement = L = H.

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

Section 00100 – Page 13, Factor 1 – Experience, Scope, 3rd paragraph down states that a relevant project shall include “Demolition and removal of underground fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 35,000 barrels”. The demolition and removal of 35,000 barrel underground fuel tanks is uncommon and will significantly limit competition on this project. Q. Can this relevant project criteria be revised to delete the underground component?

The revised sentence would read “Demolition and removal of fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 35,000 barrels”. This would allow for both underground and above ground fuel tank demolition to be considered relevant. Similar criteria has been approved in Phase I.

Yes

Delete "Demolition and removal of underground fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 35,000 barrels".

Replace with “Demolition and removal of fuel storage tanks with individual volumes no less than 35,000 barrels”

Amendment 0001, 6. N4425523R1503 P2002 Solicitation Section 00 21 16 ‐ Instructions to Proposers, Proposal Instructions, Basis of Award and Evaluation Factors, B. Evaluation Factors for Award, paragraph (2)(b)(1)(a), Revised Complexity, Planning and multidisciplinary construction of an above ground storage facility while integrating with an active fuel depot that will remain operational during the construction process. Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be substantially complete (owner can occupy facility) within twelve (12) years preceding the original date of issuance of this solicitation. Q. please confirm the projects substantially complete through June 2011 are acceptable and meet the project criteria.

Projects substantially complete through June 2011 are not acceptable, as they do not comply with the RFP requirements as amended.

Amendment 0001, 6. N4425523R1503 P2002 Solicitation Section 00 21 16 ‐ Instructions to Proposers, Proposal Instructions, Basis of Award and Evaluation Factors, B. Evaluation Factors for Award, paragraph (2)(b)(1)(a), Revised Complexity, Planning and multidisciplinary construction of an above ground storage facility while integrating with an active fuel depot that will remain operational during the construction process. Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be substantially complete (owner can occupy facility) within twelve (12) years preceding the original date of issuance of this solicitation. Q. Can the Offeror submitted projects extend to include projects substantially complete through 2011?

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience In order to meet the past performance requirements of the reference RFP can we include our key subcontractor’s past performance in order to meet the requirements stated in Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Upon reviewing FAR section 15.305 (a)2(iii) (iii) “The evaluation should take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition.” Can we use, subcontractors and key personnel who have relevant experience to meet the Factor 1 experience requirements, provided we have a letter of commitment from the entity submitted?

Based on current market conditions and in order to provide the subcontracting market adequate time to estimate this project we are requesting that the due date be extended 30 days. Can the bid due date be pushed 30 day?

See Amendment #0002 0003

Based on the number of critical PPI still awaiting answers which determine offerors ability to propose, and the limited amount of time between now and current due to prepare responses based on the forthcoming Q/A, we respectfully request a two‐week due date extension to Friday, September 15, 2023.

See Amendment #0002 003

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

Pg 15 of Solicitation)‐ Section 00 21 16 ‐ Instructions to Proposers, paragraph B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, Factor 1 Corporate Experience, 2nd paragraph under COMPLEXITY states “The two tanks are constructed in series.

The second tank's construction will start approximately 1 1/2 year after the first tank is substantially completed. Site development completion near project completion.” Question: There is nothing in DIVISION 01 ‐ GENERAL REQUIREMENT, nor Spec. Section 01 11 00 SUMMARY OF WORK, nor Spec. Section 01 14 00 WORK RESTRICTIONS, nor phasing notes in the plans that indicate the second tank's construction will need to start approximately 1 1/2 year after the first tank is substantially completed. Please advise if the 1 1/2 year staggered finish to start phasing restriction between tanks is a requirement for this project. If so, please provide the rationale for this work phasing restriction and also advise what other related work elements (e.g. demolition of existing fuel tanks 27 & 34) might also be affected by this phasing restriction.

Spec. Section 331100, page 6, 2.1.1.1.2 $ page 8, 2.2.1.2 Please clarify the bolt & nut requirement for flange and MJ connections on the fire line system. Is(ASTM A307 grade B)acceptable for flange bolts/nuts, and(high strength‐low alloy steel,ASTM A242)acceptable for MJ T‐bolts/nuts? Or do you want 316SS for all flange/MJ bolts/nuts?

A307 for the flange bolts and the A242 for the MJ T‐bolts are acceptable. 003

Spec. Section 331100, page 7, 2.1.1.2.1.2 The spec. reference ASTM D3261‐ which is a spec. for butt‐fuse fittings, but then goes on to reference socket fuse fittings. It does not appear that socket‐fuse fittings are available in DIPS or in the required sizes. Butt‐fuse is what is typically used and what would be more available. Please clarify if butt‐fuse fittings are acceptable for the fire line HDPE fittings.

Butt fuse fittings are acceptable. 003

Spec. section 3340000, page 4, 2.1.2.1 Please clarify if both IPS and DIPS HDPE pipe are acceptable for the containment drains.

Either IPS or DIPS HDPE pipe is acceptable for containment drains as long as the pipe is compatible with designed fittings (i.e. pipe sleeves/link seals, valve fittings, etc). This is on the contractor to ensure the materials procured are compatible.

Tank hydrostatic testing per drawing sheet MF801 note 3 and note 1 under Receipt of Water; states that fresh water is to be barged to project site. Specification 33 56 21.17 provides no additional information/clarification on where the source water may come from to coordinate barging. Please advise on possible sourcing options that will satisfy Note 3 under Receipt of Water that will be free of chlorides or other substances.

Phase 1 contractor was able to purchase potable water from the City of Seattle Public Water Utilities and load/transport barges from Seattle to the Manchester Fuels Facility pier. Hydrants located at Seattle Piers 90 and 91 (Elliot Bay) were used for loading the barges. City of Tacoma could also be considered as a source for the potable water.

Specification 09 97 13.15 Interior Coatings paragraphs 1.4.4.2 and 3.1; along with specification 33 56 21.17 paragraph

3.3.6 allows for a paint access door sheet to be cut into the tank shell after hydrostatic testing of the tank. Please confirm NAVFAC will agree to exempt a 2nd hydrostatic test after the access door sheet is replaced and all welds inspected as allowed by American Petroleum Institute (API) 653, paragraphs 12.3.3.3.8 and 12.3.3.

A paint access door sheet shall not be allowed to be cut for access after the tank is hydrostatically tested. Please see revised specification sections.

CD501 note 12 states “The Washington State Department of Ecology may require soil sampling beneath the tank” please advise if the Contractor is to assume additional sampling, and if so how much, for Ecology and if written notification/approval from Ecology will be required in order to proceed with backfilling the decommissioned Underground Storage Tank (UST).

Drawing sheet E‐051 & E‐052 indicates that Phase 1 Tank 802 dike containment area is in a Class 1, Division 2, Group D hazardous area. In this same dike area to the North of Tank 802, drawing MF102 indicates new fuel lines to be installed in Phase 2 which will require welding. Please advise if the Government intends to drain the fuel from Tank 802 and declassify the Class 1, Div 2 hazardous area during the time the fuel pipe work in the dike area around 802 will be performed.

The Contractor is responsible for working in an area with potential fuel vapors. Prior to any operations with open flames or sparks in the construction area Contractor is required to monitor the surrounding atmosphere to verify a gas free conditions. That is common practice and understanding for welding in fuel storage areas. API RP 2009 Safe Welding, Cutting, and Hot Work Practices in Refineries, Gasoline Plants, and Petrochemical Plants would be a good resource.

Draining of Tank 802 is not necessary for the contractor to perform their work in the tank open containment area.

Please verify that Contractor will be allowed to utilize the existing Tank 802 drive slab and place temporary protective covering over the existing FML liner in order to access the fuel pipe installation and electrical cable tray activities in Phase 2. Work access requirements will be adjacent to tank 802 and on the slope towards the existing PCC building.

Contractor shall be responsible for protection of the existing FML liner and shall repair or replace any damaged portions. Coordinate with the Contracting Officer's representative for inspection of the liner before any portions are covered up. Document condition of the existing FML with photos before it is covered and work begins.

Pre‐Proposal Inquiry

Govt Response Requirements:

1) Spec Section, Spec Title, paragraph, page

2) Drawing #

3) See Soliciation Amendment #

Addressed in Amendment Number

ES104 Note 2 – Requires the contractor to core through existing tunnel D for conduit penetrations. Depth of tunnel D and location inside of tunnel for these penetrations are not provided. ES501 detail C3 indicates 2’ typical burry on conduit below grade. Please advise the location and depth below grade these new conduit penetrations will need to be made into tunnel D

Depth to core is approximately 12'. 003

CD501 note 4 states to provide a stamped shoring plan for excavations greater than 20’ in depth.

Please confirm PE stamped drawings are not required for open cut excavation of existing tanks that are deeper than 20 feet.

PE Stamped Drawings are not required for open cut excavations. 003

Per specification 02 65 00 paragraph 3.9.2 states the interior of tanks to be demolished shall be cleaned with a pressure washer or steamed cleaned prior to demolition. Tanks will be drained of fuel by the Government as described in 02 65 00 3.9. Specification 33 01 50.55 3.7.6 states interior tanks shall include hand washing. Please confirm the Contractors required scope for fuel and sludge removal as compared to Government requirements for fuel removal where tanks are completely demolished except the bottom slabs.

Please refere to specification 33 01 50.55, part 3.5 for contractor fuel removal requirements. As stated in specification the Contractor shall assume approximately 5,000 gallons of unusable fuel or sludge will remain in each tank.

Concrete surface finishes on formed surfaces as described in Specification 03 30 00 3.9.3.2 requires a surface finish SF‐

1.0 where snap tie removal is not required when below grade.

Please clarify requirements where FML or waterproofing are applied to concrete surfaces that are below grade.

Per note 6 on S‐403, surfaces under the liner must be smooth with no projections over 1/8" (indicating snap ties must be removed). Snap ties must also be removed in order to provide effective waterproofing system. Furthermore, due to concerns for corrosion, specification 03 30 00 para 3.9.3.2 will be revised to require SF‐2 for surfaces not exposed to view (which will require tie removal and holes to be patched).

Attachments:

PPI Responses PPI 030 24667 - 50,000 Bl Structural Details PPI 030 24535 - 50,000 Bl Floor Slab