Notice No. 2.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND, PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DR., STE. 100

PEARL HARBOR, HI 96860-3134

Notice No. 2 1 July 2020

PRE-PROPOSAL QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

RFP N62742-20-R-1304

FY18 P-877 MOKAPU GATE ENTRY CONTROL AT/FP COMPLIANCE MARINE COPRS

BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HAWAII

NOTE: The following questions and answers are provided for INFORMATION ONLY. The RFP remains unchanged unless it is amended in writing on a Standard Form 30.

RESPONSES DEFERRED FROM NOTICE NO. 1 DATED 18 JUNE 2020

5. In reviewing the bid, it is an apparent that the structure as designed and specified in Sheet S-111 may be suitable for the loads but is not in accordance with accepted design practices for tensioned fabric designs for structures of this size. For example, where ever fabric comes in contact with steel, the profile of choice is always round. Sharp edges on square tubes, especially I-Beams will lead to early wear and tear and ultimate failure of the fabric. Also, for this type structure, the rafters are normally bent. Bent tubes will allow the tensioning of the fabrics into an anti-clastic state. Samples of anti-clastic fabric structures can be seen at:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Anticlastic+fabric+structures&sxsrf=ALeKk02CI5cTJ9MR5l PIc6lL2G1jR9Tc4g:1592004258548&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjtxb6Ctv 3pAhW1IDQIHdIPDdQQ_AUoAXoECBEQAw&biw=1529&bih=513&dpr=2.25

ANSWER: Provide raised connectors which allow minimal fabric contact to S-111 structural frames.

8. Spec 08 71 00. Please advise when a hardware schedule will be issued. Spec section 087100 does not include one although hardware group numbers are assigned on the door schedule.

ANSWER: Door Schedule and Hardware Sets for Specification Section 08 71 00 are included in Amendment No. 0003.

9. Asbestos and Lead Paint Survey. Provide the "Final Report, Asbestos and Lead Paint Survey, FY18 MCON Project P-877 Mokapu Gate Entry Control AT/FP Compliance, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii" dated September 2019". The specifications note that the report is appended at the end, the report cannot be found at the end.

ANSWER: A copy of the report is included in Amendment No. 0003.

10. Provide Geotechnical Report.

ANSWER: A copy of the geotechnical report will not be provided. Base bid on the contract documents.

11. Provide Rebar specification.

ANSWER: The rebar requirements are shown on Drawing S-001 and included in Specification Section 03 31 30 Paragraph 2.7.

12. S-101. Concrete footing called to be 36”, but on detail A1/S-501 same footing is called to be 4’-0”. Please clarify.

ANSWER: The concrete footing width shall be 4’-0” as shown on Detail A1/S-501. See Amendment No. 0003.

13. S-101. Wing walls from Barrier wall have no details on footing and wall width and their reinforcing. Please provide information.

ANSWER: Details will be provided for the wing walls of the barrier wall. See Amendment No.

0003.

14. S-501. Detail C1 beam height shown to be 2’-4”. Architectural drawings C4/A-305 shows 3’-2” Please clarify.

ANSWER: Provide beam height in accordance with Detail C4 on Drawing A-305. See Amendment No. 0003.

15. S-505. Please provide connection details between columns and Footing, walls and Beams.

ANSWER: Please refer to Drawing S-504, Foundation Sections. There are no columns and no beams.

16. S-506. Detail A1 beam height shown to be 1’-1”. Architectural drawings C4/A-305 shows 3’-1” Please clarify.

ANSWER: Provide beam height in accordance with Detail C4 on Drawing A-305. See Amendment No. 0003.

17. S-104. Floor plan, footing is shown to be 16”, detail C1/S-506 shows to be 2’-0”. Please clarify.

ANSWER: The footing thickness shall be 2’-0” in accordance with Detail C1 on Drawing S-506.

See Amendment No. 0003.

18. CS-402. Please provide section details for vehicle barrier “A” & “B”. No concrete profile of reinforcement provided.

ANSWER: Provide active vehicle barriers in accordance with Specification Section 34 17 13.19.

Concrete pavement detail is provided. See Amendment No. 0003.

19. S-107. Concrete footing called to be 36”, but on detail A1/S-503 same footing is called to be 4’-0”. Please clarify.

ANSWER: The concrete footing width shall be 4’-0” in accordance with Detail A1 on Drawing S-503. See Amendment No. 0003.

20. S-503. Where are details A2 and C4 referenced? Floor plan details for the Gate control House at the Entry Control Point are referencing some details from the Gate control House at the Perimeter Gate.

ANSWER: Reference to Detail A2/S-501 should have been for Detail A2/S-503. Will add the section cut for Detail C4/S-503 to Drawing S-107. See Amendment No. 0003.

21. Drawing S 101 is shown 36” width footing. However, it indicates 48” width footing on A1 / S-501. Please confirm which size is applicable.

ANSWER: See answer to question 12.

22. Mat foundation is 16 “thickness on drawing S 104. However, it is shown by 24” depth on drawing C3 / S 506. Please confirm depth of foundation.

ANSWER: See answer to question 17.

23. Drawing S 104 omitted grid line. Please provide grid line to match drawing A 206.

ANSWER: Will provide grid line to match drawing A-206. See Amendment No. 0003.

24. Concrete beam (8” x 18”) is indicated on drawing S 104. All dimension should be referred by A1 / S506. However, it seems concrete wall (36" over high) in terms of drawing A 206. Please advise.

ANSWER: See Amendment No. 0003.

Notice No. 2

25. As indicated in section 1.2 Instructions for obtaining the request for proposal notes, the RFP contains CDI information. Accordingly, we submitted the following RFI to clarify if the RFP documents can be distributed to interested subcontractors and suppliers using a secured link.

Per Notice No. issued on June 18th, we were notified that it is acceptable to share the RFP using a secured link. Please note, we were not able to send the RFP to interested subs and suppliers prior to receiving direction via notice 1 – Q &A 7 below.

Therefore, we respectfully request to extend the bid date at least three weeks to allow ample time to all bidders, subcontractors and suppliers to prepare competitive pricing.

ANSWER: Time extension is not granted.

26. 03 31 30. The marine concrete spec requires a very low (<1000 coulombs) result for the “Rapid Chloride Ion Penetration Test” (RCIPT) ASTM C- 1202.

First concern, there are no laboratories in the State of Hawaii that perform the “Rapid Chloride Ion Penetration Test” (ASTM C-1202). The University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering has been running an extensive corrosion test on numerous mix designs but did not run any rapid chloride permeability tests. Hawaiian Cement made several trial concrete mixtures and sent them to the mainland to determine the RCIPT. The mix designs and corresponding RCIP test results range from a low 1932 coulombs @ 60 days for silica fume to a high 4800 coulombs @ 60 days for straight portland cement with fly ash coming in at 3074 coulombs @ 60 days.

The specification is targeting a precise, maximum coulomb count for the concrete since C-1202 cautions the use of numbers from this test. Section 4.3 states “The numerical results (total charge passed, in coulombs) from this test method must be used with caution, especially in applications such as quality control and acceptance testing. The qualitative terms in the right-hand column of Table 1 should be used in most cases.” Here are the guidelines used in Table 1.

TABLE 1 Chloride Ion Penetrability Based on Charge Passed (1)1 Charge Passed (coulombs) Chloride Ion Penetrability >4,000 High 2,000–4,000 Moderate

1,000–2,000 Low 100–1,000 Very Low <100 Negligible

ASTM makes this recommendation because of the poor precision of this test as outlined in Section 13 Precision and Bias. Section 13 states

“13.1 Precision:

Single-Operator Precision—The single operator coefficient of variation of a single test result has been found to be 12.3 % (Note 6). Therefore, the results of two properly conducted tests by the same operator on concrete samples from the same batch and of the same diameter should not differ by more than 42 % (Note 6).

13.1.2 Multilaboratory Precision—The multilaboratory coefficient of variation of a single test result has been found to be 18.0 % (Note 6). Therefore, results of two properly conducted tests in different laboratories on the same material should not differ by more than 51 % (Note 6). The average of three test results in two different laboratories should not differ by more than 42 % (Note 7).”

The aggregates in Hawaii are basalt. Although basalt is a hard, durable rock, it does have its challenges including high absorption, high porosity, heavily textured and very angular. These properties increase water demand and subsequently high cementitious content to achieve high strength. Furthermore, the high porosity increases the permeability of concrete matrix making it very difficult to achieve low /very low chloride ion penetration.

As predicted, the mix with 50 lbs. of silica fume performed the best (1648 coulombs at 90 days) but failed to meet the required maximum 1000 coulomb level. Silica fume concrete may not be the best option for several reasons. First silica fume concrete is difficult to finish for flat work as there is little or no bleedwater, is sticky and develops plastic shrinkage cracks easily. Dispersion of the silica fume in the concrete is a concern, slurried silica fume is not offered in the United States and the dry silica fume is difficult to handle and disperse. Using a higher dosage of silica fume to achieve lower RCIPT is not recommended. The next best performer was the local AES Hawaii fly ash mix, which has been used on numerous NavFac projects. The fly ash mix had a count of 3074 coulombs at 60 days and 2261 coulombs at 90 days.

Part of the solution to this design challenge is changing the specified performance to be a “chloride ion penetrability” of moderate, which would encompass a range of 2000 to 4000 coulombs and comply with the ASTM standard of using “Chloride Ion Penetrability”. Use the 90 days results as it appears to be a more repeatable number and the results improve from the 60 days to the 90 days mark. Keep in mind, this testing should only be done in the design phase and is not recommended for field tests as the corrosion inhibitor will greatly affect the test results.

Can the Rapid Chloride Ion Penetration requirement for marine concrete change from “Very Low” (100–1,000 coulombs) to “Moderate” (2,000–4,000 coulombs at 90 days for this project?

ANSWER: Yes.

27. CS106. Are bollards required for the 22 Ft wide sliding gate located near the start of the concrete side walk?

ANSWER: Provide bollards as indicated. A callout will be added. See Amendment No. 0003.

28. CS102. Concrete apron, sliding gate strip, vehicle barriers have no section details.

ANSWER: Details will be provided. See Amendment No. 0003.

29. G-022 & Deductive Item #3 (CLIN 004). Confirm Deductive Item # 3 (Clin 004) as shown on Sheet G-022 is to leave bldg. 886 in place and not to build the new perimeter gate control house.

ANSWER: Confirmed.

30. G-023 & Deductive item # 1 CLIN 002. Clarify Deductive item # 1 (CLIN 002) shown on G-023. It is pointing the concrete canopy on of the ECP GATE CONTROL HOUSE and not the POV Search canopy?

ANSWER: See Amendment No. 0001.

31. A1/S-501 S-503. Detail A1 note SOG, Typical, no typical detail provided. Please provide Slab on Grade typical details.

ANSWER: Revised drawing provided with detail. See Amendment No. 0003.

32. Spec 01 33 00. Please verify that “working days” in section 01 33 00 is incorrect and will be changed to “calendar days” as this is a “calendar day” project. If not please reduce the durations by half to ensure the timely return of the submittals as to not impede the progress of the project.

ANSWER: Working days is correct. Bids shall be based on the contract documents.

33. Are all the required permits for the project obtained by the Government?

ANSWER: Permits are the responsibility of the Contractor unless specified otherwise in the contract documents.

34. Drawing A 304 detail C4 indicates deductive alternate No. 2 as shown below copy. Is this notes typo, or needed by more information? Please advise.

ANSWER: Restroom is not Deductive Alternate 2. See Amendment No. 0003.

35. Concrete supplier asked question regarding marine concrete specification. Project specification calls maximum value as 1,000 for Chloride ion penetrability ASTM C1202 at 56 days, Coulombs. Please refer to attached question sent by supplier.

Will the owners (or design professionals) change the Rapid Chloride Ion Penetration requirement for marine concrete from “Very low” (100-1,000 coulombs) to “Moderate” (2,000 – 4,000 coulombs) at 90 days for this project?

ANSWER: See answer to question 26.

36. CLIN 0008 Deductive Item #7. Deductive Item #7 is to delete concrete barriers curbs.

Clarify what will need to be installed instead of the concrete barrier curbs.

ANSWER: Provide gravel pavement to connect to AC pavement.

37. Base bid vs. CLIN 0005 Deductive Item #4. Confirm Paving scope on Base bid is to provide the AC Paving per detail D1/C503 (4” ac/prime coat/8” aggregate base) and the scope for Clin 005 DI#4 is to cold plane 2” only and provide new 2” AC and stripping from STA 0+20 to STA 15+88.56.

ANSWER: Confirmed.

38. Base bid vs. CLIN 0006 Deductive Item #5. Confirm Paving scope on Base bid is to provide the AC Paving per detail D1/C503 (4” ac/prime coat/8” aggregate base) and the scope for Clin 006 DI#5 is to cold plane 2” only and provide new 2” AC and stripping from STA 16+18.33 to STA 31+41.73.

ANSWER: Confirmed.

39. SOG and Vapor Barrier. Clarify what buildings SOG will required Vapor barrier.

ANSWER: Provide vapor barrier for gate control houses, Generator/Toilet/Communication Buildings, and Overwatch Stations.

40. D4/ Sheet CS402. What are the critical dimensions at this location? Each Wedge Barrier is to be 9.5' wide but there are no barriers on the DoD list that were tested at this width. If a 9'-0 or 10'-0" barrier is used, the dimensions identified will not be able to be maintained across the 34.9' dimension.

ANSWER: The distance between the active vehicle barriers shall not exceed 3 feet. The distance between the outside edge of the active vehicle barrier and fixed bollard shall not exceed 4 feet. The dimensions of the active vehicle barrier will vary by manufacturer. See Amendment 0003 for revised drawing.

41. D4/ Sheet CS402. 4'-0" requirement is generally inside to inside dimension. The drawing shows a center to center dimension. Confirm that as long as the layout conforms to the UFC and UFGS specifications that it is acceptable.

ANSWER: Provide bollard spacing as shown on the drawings. Bollard spacing conforms to the Army Standard for Access Control Points (ACP) Design Standards, which indicates 5’ 0” O.C.

Max.

42. D4/ Sheet CS402. It is not typical to have non-crash rated bollards adjacent to the crash rated final denial barriers. Please confirm that this is acceptable as shown.

ANSWER: The 8-inch Fixed Bollards adjacent to the crash-rated final denial barriers are also intended to be crash-rated.

43. D2/Sheet CS402. What are the critical dimensions at this location? Each Wedge Barrier is to be 9.5' wide but there are no barriers on the DoD list that were tested at this width. If a 9'-0 or 10'-0" barrier is used, the dimensions identified will not be able to be maintained across the 39.5' dimension.

ANSWER: See response to question 40.

44. D2/Sheet CS402. 4'-0" requirement is generally inside to inside dimension. The drawing shows a center to center dimension. Confirm that as long as the layout conforms to the UFC and UFGS specifications that it is acceptable.

ANSWER: See response to question 41.

45. D2/Sheet CS402. It is not typical to have non- crash rated bollards adjacent to the crash rated final denial barriers. Please confirm that this is acceptable as shown.

ANSWER: See response to question 42.

46. CS108. What type of bollards are the 2 shown between STA 25+14.98 & 25+25.90 on CS-108? Also, there are only 2 bollards shown in this opening. Is this acceptable for the 10.92' opening?

ANSWER: The bollards shown are the manual retractable bollard spaced 4 feet on center.

Please see detail A2 on Drawing C-504.

47. CS106. It seems that these should be removable and crash rated? Please confirm that these are in fact “fixed” bollards?

ANSWER: The location of the fixed bollards and manual retractable bollards are shown on Drawings CS106 and CS402 in Amendment 0003.

48. CS106. At station approximately 18+65, is it supposed to be the 23 bollards called out or the 7 shown on the drawings?

ANSWER: Please see revised Drawing CS106 and CS402 in Amendment 0003.

49. Please confirm that there is no possibility of encountering any contaminated soil / water?

If contaminated soil / water is countered, will the successful contractor be compensated for additional cost by submitting change order?

ANSWER: Contaminate soil and water that may be encountered is expected to be below Tier 1 Environmental Action Levels. Remedial actions are not expected to be required. Base bid on the contract documents.

50. Please confirm that the government will provide an Archaeological monitoring services for this project.

ANSWER: The Government will provide an archaeological monitor as indicated in Section 01 57 19.

51. Is it allowed to discharge dewatering effluent to existing sewer / storm system? If yes, please advise regarding discharge locations and requirements of treating water prior to discharge into sanitary sewer / storm.

ANSWER: Dewatering to an existing sewer system and storm drainage system is not allowed.

52. If discharge to existing sanitary sewer / storm system is not allowed, is it allowed to excavate dewatering pit within the site area? If yes, please provide possible location(s) of dewatering pit.

ANSWER: Contractor shall provide a dewatering pit in close proximity to the excavation area.

53. Is it required to provide dewatering observation wells / piezometers during dewatering operation? If yes, please provide us with the requirements / specs / spacing etc.

ANSWER: Drainage and dewatering system including the use of observation wells, equipment, and procedures are the Contractor's responsibility. Base bid on the contract documents. .

54. Are there any requirements for vibration and settlements markers / monitoring? If yes, please provide specs for this item.

ANSWER: Vibration and settlement monitoring are not required.

55. Please provide us with the proposed traffic control plans. This information is critical to estimating and it is the industry standard to provide traffic control plan as part of the design to have all bidders use this info to estimate same comparable scope for fair competition. Please note, that traffic control plan can significantly vary. Accordingly, it will impact the cost of this project depending how many lanes can be closed at time. Providing more work area will lead to lower cost.

ANSWER: Traffic control plans will not be provided. Notes for traffic control and lane closures are included on Drawing G-021.

56. If traffic control plan will not be provided, please provide us with a narrative to depict concept of traffic control on this project, for example whether it is required to keep one or two lanes open out of existing three lanes on Mokapu road. It is impossible to determine this requirement by the contractor without knowing the base requirements and traffic flow. Providing additional information will prevent bidders from providing costly assumptions which may escalate the cost of this project. The best case to perform pavement and base course removal and replacement on Mokapu Rd is to have full closure for all traffic except providing emergence access only. If this plan is not acceptable, is it allowed to keep ONLY one lane to accommodate traffic in both directions? Please advise.

ANSWER: See response to question 55.

57. Please confirm what communication is required between the remote fill control panel and generator's belly/daytank control panel.

ANSWER: Required communication between the remote fill control panel and generator base fuel tank control panel are fuel level 90% high alarm light, 95% high-high alarm light, alarm horn, and alarm silence switches as described in Section 33 52 10, paragraph 2.7.

58. Please confirm that the generator's belly/daytank will have adequate ports for the fill, and level sensors as required for monitoring by the remote fill system.

ANSWER: Confirmed. Please see Section 26 32 13.00 20, paragraph 2.2.4.2.

59. Reference: SPEC SECTION 01 57 19 Page 17 paragraph : 3.1.4 Endangered Birds reads:

3.1.4 Endangered Birds

Due to the large numbers of endangered birds on Base, the Contractor must continually monitor the area for endangered birds in the construction zone and laydown yard to avoid injuring, killing or harassing them whether intentionally or inadvertently by vehicles or personnel working on site.

The endangered birds that may appear at or near the construction site are the Hawaiian stilt and Hawaiian duck.

Furthermore, Environmental note No 2 on sheet G-004 indicates that nesting season of water birds is from 01 April to 01 September of each year.

Is there any restriction on construction activities during nesting season (April 1st to September 1st)? If so, please advise which activities shall not be performed during this season?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

60. Reference: SPEC SECTION 01 57 19 Page 17 paragraph : 3.1.4 Endangered Birds reads:

3.1.4 Endangered Birds

Due to the large numbers of endangered birds on Base, the Contractor must continually monitor the area for endangered birds in the construction zone and laydown yard to avoid injuring, killing or harassing them whether intentionally or inadvertently by vehicles or personnel working on site.

The endangered birds that may appear at or near the construction site are the Hawaiian stilt and Hawaiian duck.

Furthermore, Environmental note No 2 on sheet G-004 indicates that nesting season of water birds is from 01 April to 01 September of each year.

What precautions need to be taken other than monitoring the area of endangered birds?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

61. Reference: SPEC SECTION 01 57 19 Page 17 paragraph : 3.1.4 Endangered Birds reads:

3.1.4 Endangered Birds

Due to the large numbers of endangered birds on Base, the Contractor must continually monitor the area for endangered birds in the construction zone and laydown yard to avoid injuring, killing or harassing them whether intentionally or inadvertently by vehicles or personnel working on site.

The endangered birds that may appear at or near the construction site are the Hawaiian stilt and Hawaiian duck.

Furthermore, Environmental note No 2 on sheet G-004 indicates that nesting season of water birds is from 01 April to 01 September of each year.

Do we have to consider that the entire site will have endangered birds?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

62. Reference: SPEC SECTION 01 57 19 Page 17 paragraph : 3.1.4 Endangered Birds reads:

3.1.4 Endangered Birds

Due to the large numbers of endangered birds on Base, the Contractor must continually monitor the area for endangered birds in the construction zone and laydown yard to avoid injuring, killing or harassing them whether intentionally or inadvertently by vehicles or personnel working on site.

The endangered birds that may appear at or near the construction site are the Hawaiian stilt and Hawaiian duck.

Furthermore, Environmental note No 2 on sheet G-004 indicates that nesting season of water birds is from 01 April to 01 September of each year.

If construction activities are stopped or slowed down due to presence of endangered birds, will the successful contractor be compensated for time extension and additional costs incurred due to delay? If not, shall all contractors factor in the bid possible delays due to endangered birds? If so, how many days of delay we need to factor in?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

63. 4” Topsoil for grass restoration of all disturbed areas. Please confirm that imported 4” top soil shall be provided for grass restoration of all disturbed areas.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

64. Site Demolition plans CD101 thru CD108 indicate clearing and grubbing, trees removal, signs removal, street lights removal and other items need to be removed on both sides of Mokapu road.

Please confirm that cost of removal of all items above listed shall not be included in CLIN 0005 & CLIN 0006 (Deductive items 4 & 5). In other words, the above items shall be performed regardless whether deductive items 4 & 5 are exercised or not.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

65. Bid Item # 0008: Deductive Item No.7: The Basis for deductive item no.7 is to delete Concrete Barrier Curbs. Question: Does all the 18” Barrier Curb comes under this deductive item or only 18” Barrier curb Specified in the drawing? Because there is this concrete barrier curb on the either side of AC pacing from STA 26+92 to 31+52 and also on right side of AC Paving from STA 17+20 to 26+73. This AC pavement comes under “Bid Item # 0006:

Deductive Item No.5: The Basis for this deductive Item No.5 is to delete road near ECP”. Please advise if this 18” Barrier curb falls under Bid Item # 0006 or Bid Item # 0008 or Base Bid Item # 0001.

66. Is the 18” Barrier Curb @ Island “F” part of Deductive Item No. 07 (CLIN 0008) as shown on CS404, or the base bid as shown on CS107 and CS108?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

67. Is the pavement striping of Mokapu Rd. included in Deductive Item No. 04 (CLIN 0005) & Deductive Item No. 05 (CLIN 006) as described on sheets CP102 to CP109? Please confirm, this means that if Deductive items No 4 and/or 5, is accepted, striping on the relevant portions of Mokapu Rd. is also deducted.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

68. Is the 18” Barrier at the Perimeter Gate Control House, 4’-6” w/ 12”Below Grade = 3’6” tall shown on structural sheets S-101, S-107, A1/S-501 and A1/S-503, or 3’-0” Tall, as shown on architectural A-101, A-104, A-201, A-203, A-301, A-302, and A-303?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

69. Where the ECP Canopy is located and dimensioned per architectural and structural drawings, the 6” curb & island around the columns and the columns themselves conflict with the 18” Barrier curb on the roadway through the canopy, as shown on the civil drawings. If there is supposed to be a 6” curb and slab infill around the ECP Canopy columns, please show how to incorporate or terminate the 18” barrier curb.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

70. Is the POV Search Canopy footing 6’ wide x 46’ long as shown on B1/A-109 or 7’ wide x 52’ long as shown on S-111 & C2/S-507?

B. Is there a slab above the footing (not shown) with different dimensions? Where is finish grade on detail C2/S-507?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

71. (FYI, no cost implications) The door position on the exterior wall at the electrical room and comm room at the two Utility Buildings is different on the architectural plans and the structural plans. Please confirm the architectural layout is to be followed in this case.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

72. Regarding the two Overwatch Stations. Is the foundation 16” thick per plan on S-104 and S-110? Or 24” thick per detail C1/S-506?

73. Regarding the two Overwatch Stations. Do the 8” concrete stem walls have #5 @ 12” each way, on each face per note on S-104 and S-110 or a single centered mat #5 @ 12” each way?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

74. Regarding the two Overwatch Stations. Is the building 6’ wide per the structural plans or 6’-4” wide per the architectural plans?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

75. Regarding the two Overwatch Stations. Detail A1/S-506 shows a “soffit” 1’-1” tall, at the edges of the building. The architectural sheets show this “soffit/wall” as >3’ tall, varying with the slope of the roof. Both are suspended from the concrete roof. Please confirm that the two cantilevered beams and two columns are intended to support the concrete roof with the hanging concrete “soffit/walls”. Please confirm the glass windows are not intended to support the roof structure.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

76. Regarding the two Overwatch Stations. What is filling the space above the door? There seems to be no material in this space per the details on sheets A-206, A-305, or A-403.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

77. Regarding the concrete encasement/protection of the communication lines to remain: on sheet CU102, encasement of duct lines are shown for one of the lines as it crosses each of the travel ways. On sheets ET104 and ET105, there is a second line shown, going from an existing hand hole near the POV search Canopy to the east. Please confirm this line requires protection in the same manner as the other line shown protected on CU102.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

78. Is the contractor required to maintain bike/pedestrian access/passage along the north side of Mokapu Road (bike lane) during construction?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

79. Is there a joint pattern for the concrete pavement at the Perimeter gate for the contractor to follow? There seems to be evidence of a jointing plan visible on the electrical site plan E-110 and ET109, at approximately 10’ squares. Can we assume this pattern for bidding purposes?

80. Please provide a detail for “contraction joints” for concrete pavement.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

81. What is the size (diameter) and spacing for the smooth dowels at the construction joints?

This information is missing from detail C4/C-518.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

82. In specification section 31 23 00.00 20 paragraph 3.15.2.4, please consider clarifying the requirements for compaction testing subgrade and fill materials every 250 SF to apply only to subgrades and structural fills below buildings/foundations. For the open site grading and compaction, such as below the gravel pavement, sidewalks, vegetated berms, & AC roads, recommend the requirement could be changed to something less stringent; possibly one test per 250 square yards? As an example, the >28,000 SF of Type A Gravel Pavement, would require ~112 density tests on the subgrade. Testing on a 16’ grid, seems excessive, for areas that will receive a fairly consistent compaction effort.

83. Will the Govt. consider a reduction in conduit size from 6” to 5” for duct sections A and B? (11.5 KV, med voltage conduits).

ANSWER: Response deferred.

84. E-604, One-Line, Perimeter Gate-New. Voltage Characteristics indicate 240v single phase. Shall a 3p200a breaker be provided for the meter main and the enclosed circuit breaker?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

85. Shall a provision for switching of the neutral conductors be provided within the respective ATS units as indicated on the drawings?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

86. E-401 - Confirm panel designation 2EDP is correct for this location.

87. E-111,112,552 - Identify location of type S3 fixture and provide data for type S2 fixtures.

88. ET-507, Det A2, Reference to E-408 (Nonexistent page) - Confirm references to pole locations and quantities.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

89. ET-103, note 2 - Confirm reference to Bid Item 6.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

90. ET-701 - Confirm the contractor shall ONLY install new conduit and interduct(s) without wires from TMH 105-TMH 100 as shown on the Telcom Cable Schematic Diagram.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

91. For Factor 1 Experience and Factor 2 Past Performance may offerors submit projects on which they were a subcontractor to a prime? If this is acceptable, please clarify if offerors should include evaluations for such project even if that evaluation is evaluating the prime contractor’s effort?

ANSWER: Yes, reference Document 00202 Section 2.3, Factor 1 – Experience and Factor 2 – Past Performance (a).

92. Det C2/S-507. Footing detail does not provide note for stir-ups.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

93. S-105, A-101. At the ECP canopy, what floor finish will be between columns. All sections are drawn at columns, and no notes are shown on floor plans.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

94. S-111, C2/S-507. Architectural elevation and sections show a curb? or the footing has 6” exposed? Please clarify Provide footing elevation/ Finish floor elevation for the POV Canopy.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

95. CS401. Perimeter Gate Control house concrete Apron details are not provided. Provide Concrete and reinforcing Apron detail.

96. CS402. Vehicle Barrier “A” and “B” does not provide any details for concrete work.

Provide concrete and reinforcing details.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

97. CS106. There appear to be five (5) bollards in front of a 22-ft wide sliding gate. Please confirm these are manual retractable bollards per A2/C-504.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

98. CS106. Manual retractable bollards are located on clusters throughout the project. Detail provided shows one bollard detail. Please provide a bollard cluster detail.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

99. C504. Please provide a site plan where ALL bollards are called out. Locations are not clear. i.e Concrete for sliding gate (C1/C-504) show circles, similar to how bollards are shown on other locations, but no bollard is called out.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

100. Section 05 50 13 paragraph 2.4 describes Corner Guards. No corner guards are shown on the drawings. Please confirm this paragraph shall be deleted.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

101. C504. Please provide specifications for Manual Retractable Bollards required by detail A2/C504.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

102. C-514. Concrete strip for non-vehicle rated slide gate does not show thickness or reinforcement.

103. S-003/C-516. Trench drain details A3 & A4/C-516 and detail C3/S-003 have conflicting information. Please clarify.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

104. S-105. Entry control point Canopy is not showing site dimensions. Please clarify distances between structural columns, and concrete curb and 18” barrier curb, and asphalt edge.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

105. Sec 03 31 90. Marine concrete is the only concrete specified on the project. Is the intent to all concrete structures will be Marine grade concrete? Or provide specification for concrete above grade.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

106. Sec 31 31 16.19. Specification calls for stainless steel mesh as a termite control. Since most structures and materials concrete and materials no consumed by termites, is the stainless-steel mesh required? If required. Provide details.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

107. CS-101. Is restoration of laydown/storage area to be considered part of 450-day duration for project.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

108. Detail B1/C502. Are Expansion joints required in barrier curb?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

109. Structural Plans and Spec. 31.23.00.00 20 section 3.5. Structural Plans do not call out for probe and grout. Specification 31.23.00.00.20 section 3.5 Probing and Grouting mentions probe the magazine foundation? Is this specification section for this project?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

110. CP-107. Provide detail for concrete paving at POV Canopy.