About this file

Amendment_0004.pdf

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Att.11_-_Sheet_C-114_rev1.pdf PDF
Amendment_0006.pdf PDF
Att.10_-_Sheet_V-106_rev1.pdf PDF
Amendment_0005.pdf PDF
Att.9-SF_24-98.pdf PDF
Att.8-DBA_Wages_1-4-19.pdf PDF
Att.7-Revised_P238_Civil_Plans_1-22-2019.pdf PDF
Amendment_0003.pdf PDF
Amendment_0002.pdf PDF
Att._7_–_Revised_P238_Civil_Plans.pdf PDF
Amendment_0001.pdf PDF
Att._1_-_P238_Construction_Plans_and_Specifications.pdf PDF
Solicitation.pdf PDF
Att._3_-_Final_Environmental_Assessment.pdf PDF
Att._2_-_P238_Civil_Plans.pdf PDF
Show all 15

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

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

SUBJECT: SOLICITATION N6247319B2425, DESIGN-BID-BUILD PROJECT P238, AIRFIELD SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS AT MARINE CORPS AIR

STATION MIRAMAR, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

The purpose of this amendment is to provide scope revisions and response to Request for Information. See page 2 for revisions.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 8

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 24-Jan-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 N6247319B2425

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

03-Jan-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 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 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

24-Jan-2019

CODE

NAVFAC SOUTHWEST

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CONTRACT CORE

CODE: CIMAR

1220 PACIFIC HIGHWAY

SAN DIEGO CA 92132-5190

N62473 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6247319B2425

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:

AMENDMENT 0004

The following changes are hereby incorporated into the subject solicitation. Changes are shown in red italics fonts.

Section 1: Scope Revisions to Solicitation

Section 1: Scope Revisions to Solicitation

A. The latest Davis Bacon Wage Determination has been incorporated to this solicitation. See Att.8-DBA

Wages_1-4-19 for details.

B. Submitted bids shall include the following items:

1. Standard Form 1442 (Page 1 of 102 – Page 3 of 102)

a. Complete Boxes 14-20 on Page 2 of 102.

b. State the price on Page 3 of 102.

2. Section 00600 - Representations & Certifications (Page 10 of 102 to Page 41 of 102). Ensure to complete all appropriate fields. (Original only. No copies are required.)

3. BID BOND (Original only. No copies are required.)

SF 24 Bid Bond (Att.9-SF_24-98): The bidder shall furnish a bid guarantee. The amount of the bid guarantee shall be 20 percent of the bid price or $3,000.000, whichever is less (see FAR 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee).

Section 2: Response to Requests for Information (RFI’s)

RFI #4

Question is regarding: Existing H and Round Post Sizes/Dimensions Section of the Request for Proposal: N6247319B2425Att._2_-_P238_Civil_Plans.pdf Page number: Page 35 (C-502) Detail: A4

QUESTION: Can you please provide the existing round pipe outside diameter of both the line and corner/ terminal posts? Can you also provide the dimensions of the existing H-line posts?

Response #4 Design team anticipated that all existing pole were installed and met standard specification on RR-F-191.

Therefore, table below shows minimum size expecting to be in place.

Post type Pole DIA. (in)

Remark Existing New1

Steel pipe (SP) 1.9 2.0 Line Steel pipe (SP) 2.375 2.375 Corner Steel ‘H’ section (SH1) 2.25 x 1.7 2.875 Line or Corner

1. New steel post should be minimum Grade ‘A’ with minimum dimension indicated above.

2. New steel post should be compatible with the specified fence height or shall be consistent with what it is specified on plans.

RFI #12

Question is regarding: Hand delivered Bids Section of the Request for Proposals: Specifications Paragraph: (d) Page Number: 5

QUESTION: Can proposals be mailed by Fedex or equal as opposed to hand delivered?

Response #12 No, mailing bids are not acceptable. All bids must be hand delivered and deposited in the bid box prior to the time and date set for bid opening.

RFI #13

Question is regarding: Exact Post Sizing Section of the Request for Proposal: Field Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: With the field measurements we took during the site visit we believe it is highly unlikely a 2-7/8” schedule 40 posts will fit over the existing H posts, will 20 weight posts or less be acceptable or do we assume using 3-1/2” posts? It is our understanding part of this fence was done previously with this system, if so, can you give us the exact size and wall thickness of the posts that were used before?

Response #13 Minimum new post diameter dimension should be 2-7/8” to be utilized on Steel “H” section post. (See Response #4 table for reference). Information regarding size and wall thickness of the previously provided and installed post is not available.

RFI #14

Question is regarding: Current round gate posts Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: There are a number of existing gate posts that are 4” and 6 5/8” diameter. Can we extend those posts by welding extensions?

Response #14 Appropriate response is being researched.

RFI #15

Question is regarding: Quality Control Section of the Request for Proposal: Specifications Section 01 45 00.00 20 Paragraph:

Page number: 1-19

QUESTION: In the Quality Control Section 01 45 00.00 20, there are a lot of references to other trades, materials and services that will not be relevant to this job, especially concerning QC inspectors from section 1.5.4 to 1.5.6.

What can we realistically expect in regards to a Quality Control programs?

Response #15 For Quality Control programs, refer to the followings:

Section 1.5.4 – A. Experience, B. Area of responsibility: Concrete, material, frequency.

Section 1.5.5 – Special Inspector not required.

Section 1.5.6 – Fire Protection Engineer not required.

RFI #16

Question is regarding: Utility locates Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: Does the base provide a utility locating service?

Response #16 The FEAD will provide the contractor with a dig permit form that will get NAVFAC Utilities and GIS to do mark outs. However, the contractor is responsible to hire contacting dig alert and a third party mark out team to verify all provided mark outs.

RFI #17

Question is regarding: Barb tape or V-shaped barb arms Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: Throughout the specs there are references to barb tape and/or V-shaped barb arms. Are we to assume that this is just standard language for other project and that these references will not apply to this project?

Response #17 Barb wire, single extension arm, and three strand to be use for this project.

RFI #18

Question is regarding: Sleeve Over Posts Section of the Request for Proposal: C-502 Detail A4 Plans Specs RRF 191 3D Paragraph: 1 – SP3 Page number:C-502

QUESTION: 2.375 OD posts cannot be sleeved over a 2.25 x 1.70 “H” Post as the inner diameter of the round post is over a ¼” too small. Will a larger diameter post be considered for a line post, or is there a method not mentioned which allows for the 2.375 post to go over the “H” post? As it stands now sleeving over existing “H” posts is not possible.

Response #18 The minimum new post diameter dimension should be 2-7/8” to be utilized on Steel “H” section post. (See Response #4 table for reference).

RFI #19

Question is regarding: Barbed Tape Section of the Request for Proposal: 32.31.13.53 Paragraph: 3.6 Page number: 8

QUESTION: Is barbed tape (razor wire) called out for this project? There was no evidence of barbed tape on both the existing fence as well as the new fence we observed on the job walk. If barbed tape is required, please confirm this.

Response #19 Refer to Response #17

RFI #20

Question is regarding: Ground Rods Section of the Request for Proposal: 32.31.13.53

Paragraph: 3.8 Page number:8

QUESTION: There is roughly 26,000LF of fencing. Plans do not show where grounding points are required for overhead powerlines of 600V capacity and buildings within 50ft of the fence line. Plans specifically do not show where underground bonds exothermic welds are required. Please provide this information.

Response #20 Grounding is required. 1. Both posts of a gate, 2. When fence changes angle at more than 15 degrees, 3. At locations not exceeding 650 feet. Refer to specification section 32.31.13.53, grounding.

RFI #21

Question is regarding: Concrete Section of the Request for Proposal: 32.31.13.53 Paragraph: 2.6 Page number: 5

QUESTION: Please confirm that there will not be a 3 wait time for posts to cure in concrete. Please confirm that posts requiring footings can be set and stretched the same day in order to be in compliance with Security of the Air Field overnight.

Response #21 Posts requiring footing shall be set and stretched the same day.

Mix-design shall anticipate such condition…the curing should be long enough to ensure that the specified value for concrete properties will be developed; adequate water-cement ratio in combination with (accelerating) admixtures can reduce the initial and final time of concrete setting, and develop early strength avoiding no desire cracks.

RFI #22

Question is regarding: Crash Cables Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: Please confirm crash cabling is not required for this project Response #22 Crash cabling is not required for this project.

RFI #23

Question is regarding: Recycling of Fencing Section of the Request for Proposal: 1.74.19 Paragraph: 1.6 Page number: 2

QUESTION: For our waste management plan would it be possible to utilize Environmental Management S-7 for the recycling of metals resulting from demolition?

Response #23 Appropriate response is being researched.

RFI #24

Question is regarding: Gate frames / electromechanically operated locks Section of the Request for Proposal: 32.31.13.53 Paragraph: 2.7.2 Page number: 6

QUESTION: There were no indications of electromechanical locks on the job walk nor are there any supporting details for electromechanical locks in the plans details. Please confirm that electromechanical locks will not be required for this project.

Response #24 There is not a requirement for electromechanical locks.

RFI #25

Question is regarding: washout area Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph0 Page number: 0

QUESTION: Please confirm that we will be able to access the washout area (large valley) from the concrete plant side of the fence line. Will grubbing of 20ft inside the fence line be required in this area?

Response #25 That will have to be arranged with Hanson Plant and coordinate operations to avoid conflicts. The Base does have a lease agreement with the plant; the base should have access to the fence line.

RFI #26

Question is regarding: NECO Site Section of the Request for Proposal: Amendment #2 File #2 Revised Civil Plans Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: P File#2 ATT7 Revised P238 Civil Plans hyper link broken. Please fix.

404 - File or directory not found.

The resource you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable.

Response #26 “Att.7-Revised P238 Civil Plans_1-22-2019” in Amendment 0003 replaced the corrupted “Att. 7 – Revised P238 Civil Plans” attachment in its entirety.

RFI #27

Question is regarding: Bid Bound Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: Please provide copy of the bid bound form and advise of the % for the bid bound.

Response #27 SF 24 Bid Bond (Att.9-SF_24-98): The bidder shall furnish a bid guarantee. The amount of the bid guarantee shall be 20 percent of the bid price or $3,000.000, whichever is less (see FAR 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee).

RFI #28

Question is regarding: Clear and grubbing Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: At the job walk, there were conversation that 10” outside and 20” inside fence line need to be clear.

However, we do not see this requirement in the bid document. Please advise if there is any clearing and grubbing for this work and if there is please to include the amount in SQY.

Response #28

The clear and grub will be performed by others, the dimensions are 10 feet outside and 23 feet in the inside.

Clear and Grub to be done by others. Note, coordinate with base environmental department.

RFI #29

Question is regarding: New fence section Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: Please let us know how many linear feet of new fence for this project?

Response #29 Refer to the plans for begin and end stationing.

RFI #30

Question is regarding: Grubbing Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: During the site visit, there was discussion that a separate contractor will be grubbing the trees and brush along the fence line especially near the concrete batch plant area. Can we assume that all this grubbing will be completed and if so how far away from both sides of the fence will they be grubbing?

Response #30 Refer to Response #28

RFI #31

Question is regarding: Bid Bond Amount Section of the Request for Proposal:

Paragraph:

Page number:

QUESTION: We do not see a bid bond percentage amount. Can you please verify the amount of the bid bond?

Response #31 See Response #27

NOTE: All other paragraphs, provisions, and conditions to this solicitation remain unchanged. All prospective Offerors must acknowledge receipt of all amendments in Block 19 of the SF1442. Failure to acknowledge receipt of all amendments may result in the proposal being rejected as non-responsive.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been added by full text:

52.228-1 BID GUARANTEE (SEP 1996)

(a) Failure to furnish a bid guarantee in the proper form and amount, by the time set for opening of bids, may be cause for rejection of the bid.

(b) The bidder shall furnish a bid guarantee in the form of a firm commitment, e.g., bid bond supported by good and sufficient surety or sureties acceptable to the Government, postal money order, certified check, cashier's check, irrevocable letter of credit, or, under Treasury Department regulations, certain bonds or notes of the United States.

The Contracting Officer will return bid guarantees, other than bid bonds, (1) to unsuccessful bidders as soon as practicable after the opening of bids, and (2) to the successful bidder upon execution of contractual documents and bonds (including any necessary coinsurance or reinsurance agreements), as required by the bid as accepted.-

(c) The amount of the bid guarantee shall be 20 percent of the bid price or $3,000,000, whichever is less.-

(d) If the successful bidder, upon acceptance of its bid by the Government within the period specified for acceptance, fails to execute all contractual documents or furnish executed bond(s) within 10 days after receipt of the forms by the bidder, the Contracting Officer may terminate the contract for default.-

(e) In the event the contract is terminated for default, the bidder is liable for any cost of acquiring the work that exceeds the amount of its bid, and the bid guarantee is available to offset the difference.

(End of provision)

(End of Summary of Changes)

File details come from the government source that posted it.