20R1313-Note8.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DR STE 100

PEARL HARBOR HI 96860-3134

Notice No. 8 20 January 2021

PRE-PROPOSAL QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

RFP N62742-20-R-1313

FY20 MCAF P-9021/PAF189021 APSI – AIRFIELD DEVELOPMENT, PHASE 1 AND FY20

MCAF P-9022/PAF189022 APSI – PARKING APRON, TINIAN INTERNATIONAL

AIRPORT, TINIAN, CNMI

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. 7 DATED 12 JANUARY 2021

134. Part C, Notes 3 & 4 on Drawing CF101 call for fittings on directional changes to be 3D bend fittings with minimum bend radius three times the nominal diameter. Other drawings for the hydrant loop piping (CF102 – CF106) only call out to provide 90-degree bends at the relative stations. Specification Section 33 52 43.13 also does not specify 3D bend fittings. Please clarify and confirm whether 3D bend fittings are required for all the 90-degree bends shown on the hydrant pipeline profiles.

ANSWER: All bends/elbows in the DN300 piping must have a minimum bend radius of 3.0 times the pipe diameter. Factory forged 3D elbows or fabricated 3D induction bends with a minimum wall thickness of 6.35 mm are acceptable. Specification Section 33 52 43.13, paragraph 2.1.3.1, is revised via Amendment No. 0009.

135. The issued Amendments contain numerous new or revised drawings that are only provided in 8-1/2 x 11-inch paper size. Can you please provide these drawings in 11 x 17-inch paper size in order to match the RFP drawings?

ANSWER: Previously amended drawings will be re-uploaded to the betaSAM website in full size.

136. Part C, Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 2.1.3.3, is calling out insulating gaskets with fluoroelastomer (Viton) sealing surfaces, mylar insulating sleeves, and phenolic insulating washers. The Insulating Flange Kit Detail on A3/EK503 shows G-10 insulating flange gasket with nitrile sealing element, G10 insulating sleeves, and G10 insulating washers, which is different than Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 2.1.3.3. Please clarify and confirm if contractor is to provide insulating flange kits per Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph

2.1.3.3 or per Detail A3/EK503 with all G10 material.

ANSWER: The materials should comply with detail A3/EK503. Specification Section 33 52 43.13, paragraph 2.1.3.3, is revised via Amendment No. 0009 to show the same material as the detail.

137. Part C - Specification Section 26 42 19.00 20 CATHODIC PROTECTION BY IMPRESSED CURRENT. Direct-buried pipelines, as specified on this project, are not protected until the permanent impressed current is activated, which requires permanent power. We respectfully recommend that the designer consider requiring the hydrant loop piping to additionally have a sacrificial anode requirement to protect the stainless steel fuel piping during construction of this phase (P-9021 & P-9022) of the development at this base. Will a contract change be included as a pre-bid amendment for the contractors to provide temporary sacrificial anode for all buried pipeline during construction until the permanent impressed current is commissioned and activated?

ANSWER: No.

138. 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.

ANSWER: None required.

139. Part C, Specification Section 33 52 23.15, Paragraph 3.2.2 NDE Testing Frequency, states to provide 100 percent radiographic testing or 100 percent PAUT for all butt welds on the hydrant loop piping. Please clarify and confirm whether radiographic testing equipment will be allowed on the island of Tinian in order to perform the radiographic testing. If radiographic testing equipment is not allowed on Tinian, can we assume that PAUT testing will be an acceptable substitute for radiographic testing of the welds?

ANSWER: Radiographic testing equipment will be permitted on the island of Tinian. Phased Array UT (PAUT) is also allowed per Section 33 52 23.15 and may be utilized at the contractor’s option as an acceptable substitute for RT. The acceptance criteria for PAUT is the same as the acceptance criteria for radiography, as defined in Section 33 52 23.15 paragraph 3.3. The contractor should note that if the use of PAUT is selected in lieu of radiography, meeting the radiographic standards for PAUT requires a calibration standard within the requirements of ASME Section V, and meeting the diameter, thicknesses, and flaws that can be detected with radiography.

140. Part C, Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 2.1.2 External Protective Coatings for Buried Steel Piping, states that all contractors and subcontractors that perform surface preparation or coating application shall be certified to either ISO 9001 or SSPC QP 1 and SSPC

QS 1. Does the ISO 9001 or SSPC QP 1 & QS 1 apply to the field application of heat shrink sleeves and tape wrap on the weld joints and fittings? Also, will a Coating Inspector be required for the field application of heat shrink sleeves and tape wrap?

ANSWER: Individuals applying tape wrap or heat-shrink sleeve coating systems are not required to meet the Qualifications of Coating Contractors for Field Coating but must meet any training or qualification recommendations of the manufacturer. Specification Section 33 52 43.13, paragraph 2.1.2.3, is revised via Amendment No. 0009 to clarify. Contractors should note that field-applied tape wrap or heat-shrink sleeve coatings must be inspected by a coating inspector employed by a coating inspection company meeting the qualifications in Section 33 52

43.13 paragraphs 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5. Field quality control of field applied tape wrap or heat-shrink sleeve coating systems must meet the requirements of Section 33 52 43.13 paragraph 2.1.2.8.

141. Part C, Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 3.9.1, Pipeline Internal Inspection Operations, states that the apron loop must be pigged as a complete loop, launching and receiving at the cross-over valve pit. Paragraph 3.9.1.3 Pig Load And Launch states that the contractor must provide temporary pig launchers and receivers. The drawings do not show the temporary pig launcher and receiver and how it shall be connected to the cross-over valve pit.

Please provide drawings showing the required connection of the temporary pig launcher and receiver at the cross-over valve pit.

ANSWER: Type and configuration of temporary pig launcher and receiver are contractor means and methods. Temporary pig launcher and receiver shall be connected to the hydrant loop piping at the cross-over valve pit. The intent is to pig the buried segments of the pipeline; the full port plug valves, “H-shaped” crossover spool, and/or DN300 blind flanges in the cross-over valve pit may be temporarily removed to accommodate pigging and video inspection activities at the contractor’s option provided that they are reinstalled per the contract documents following those activities. Specification Section 33 52 43.13, paragraph 3.9.1.3, is revised via Amendment No.

0009 to clarify.

142. Part C, Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 3.8.2 Hydrostatic Test, states to hydrostatically test the piping system with potable water at 2.84 MPa (412 psi) in accordance with ASME B31.3 and API RP 1110. This pressure is higher than the rated pressure of the valves, which can cause damage to the valves and their internal components during the hydrostatic test. On previous hydrant fueling projects, the hydrostatic test is usually performed with fuel at a pressure of 1.9 MPa (275 psi) in accordance with Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS) Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 3.9.1.2. Please confirm whether the hydrostatic test on this project can be reduced to 275 psi.

ANSWER: Hydrostatic testing must be performed at 2.84 MPa as specified. Valves and appurtenances not rated for the test pressure shall be temporarily removed during testing and temporary blinds or spools provided as required. Specification Section 33 52 43.13, paragraph 3.8.2, is revised via Amendment No. 0009 to clarify.

143. Part C, Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 3.11.3 Video Inspection, states to use a tethered crawler-type inspection unit to inspect the entire length of the hydrant loop, and that the inspection crawler must have a minimum tether cable length of 1,000 meters. In our research, we have not been able to find a vendor/subcontractor that has a tethered type crawler inspection unit that meets the 1,000-meter cable length. The tether cable length usually only goes up to 1,000 feet. With the length of the hydrant loop piping close to 5,000 feet in length, it is almost impossible to perform a video inspection after all the piping has been installed. Please provide a list of video inspection companies that can meet the specifications. Will the contractor be allowed to provide video inspection of the hydrant loop piping in smaller length sections just before the entire pipeline is installed?

ANSWER: Video inspection must be completed after the pipeline is completed and hydrostatically tested. At the contractor's option, the inspection may be accomplished in a single segment or in multiple segments by entering the line at the cross-over valve pit and/or the isolation valve pit. Depending on the contractor's means and methods, the contractor may, at its own expense, temporarily remove the DN300 valves and flanged piping spools located in the cross-over valve pit and/or isolation valve pit to accommodate the inspection and then reinstall removed components following inspection activities. The minimum tether cable length must be sufficient to accommodate inspection of the longest piping segment. Specification Section 33 52 43.13, paragraph 3.11.3, is revised via Amendment No. 0009 to clarify.

144. Drawing SP101 shows the required dimensions and sizes for the two rolling pit covers.

The “D” and “S” dimensions shown for the rolling pit covers are wider than the width of standard shipping containers or flat racks and cannot be shipped to Tinian. Would the contractors and/or manufacturers of the rolling pit covers be able to design the pit covers and frames in half sections such that the halves can be bolted together during installation in the field?

Having the half sections will allow the rolling pit covers to fit into standard shipping containers and flat racks for transport to Tinian.

ANSWER: The contractor may submit modifications/alternatives to the rolling pit cover details.

However, any alternate means of assembly must meet the intent of the design which is to provide a weatherproof cover that will not require additional maintenance.

145. Part C, Specification Section 33 52 43.13, Paragraph 2.2, states that valves in stainless steel pipelines must be 304 or Type 316 stainless steel. Please confirm that for the ball valves, the gear actuators may be cast steel and only the valve bodies are required to be stainless steel.

We assume that the Plug Valves, per this specification, must also have stainless steel bodies.

Please confirm that the operators on the Plug Valves may be cast steel as the valve bodies are available in stainless steel but the actuators are not. Would the government accept Plug Valves with electroless nickel coating inside and outside in lieu of stainless steel valve bodies?

ANSWER: Specification Section 33 52 43.13, paragraph 2.2, is revised via Amendment No.

0009 to allow valves in stainless steel pipelines to be Type 304 or Type 316 stainless steel or carbon steel internally plated with chromium or nickel or internally electroless nickel plated.

NOTICE NO. 8

149. Page 4 of SF1442 that is part of the RFP states that “[a] firm fixed-price is required for all line items.” The RFP also states at page 4 of Document 00202 that the term “Logistical challenges” “is where construction materials, equipment, manpower, and workforce infrastructure are not readily available, similar to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.” In addition, the RFP includes a liquidated damages provision at section I.29 of page 4 of Document 00700. However, the RFP does not specifically refer to the current worldwide COVID pandemic except in connection with a one-time pre-proposal site visit referenced in section I.19 at page 12 of Document 00100 of the RFP (FAR 52.236-27, Site Visit (Construction) (FEB 1995)). As such, the RFP does not identify any COVID-related restrictions on contractor access to CNMI or Tinian International Airport. Please identify all COVID-related testing, prescreening, immigration, quarantine (including quarantine requirements associated with Saipan Island and Tinian Island), or other requirements for access to CNMI (“CNMI COVID requirements”) currently in existence that will apply to work to be performed under the contract – work that involves logistical challenges and provides for liquidated damages.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

150. Please identify all COVID-related testing, prescreening, immigration, quarantine, or other requirements for access to Tinian Island currently in existence that will apply to work to be performed under the contract (“U.S. Government COVID requirements”), including any CNMI COVID requirements that NAVFAC will impose on work to be performed at Tinian International Airport.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

151. Does NAVFAC expect offerors to prepare their price proposals based on the currently existing CNMI COVID requirements and U.S. Government COVID requirements identified in response to questions 1 and 2 above?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

152. If NAVFAC requires compliance with CNMI COVID requirements or U.S. Government COVID requirements not currently identified, will such required compliance with subsequently imposed requirements constitute a change to the contract under FAR 52.243-4, Changes (JUN 2007) (section 1.121 at page 11 of 18 of Document 00700 in the RFP), potentially entitling the contractor to cost and schedule relief in accordance with the terms of the referenced Changes clause?

If no, what contract provision will provide cost and schedule relief for COVID related unavoidable delays?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

153. Will pretesting documentation be required to allow bypassing of any quarantine restrictions in CNMI, specifically Saipan Island as well as Tinian Island?

If yes, please describe such documentation.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

154. Are there sufficient medical infrastructure in place on Tinian in order to handle a COVID outbreak of greater than 25 people? If so, please describe that infrastructure.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

155. With respect to COVID, will the contractor be required to contact trace, temperature check, and provide reports regarding status to the U.S. Navy during performance of this contract?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

156. Due to COVID concerns, will NAVFAC include FAR clause 48 CFR 52.249-14 – Excusable Delays – in the contract?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

157. Subject: Request for Time Extension of the Proposal Submission. The various deferments of the due date for proposal submission have caused an unfortunate disturbance in the otherwise seamless process of developing a consolidated price proposal built on current vendor prices, subcontract quotations, freight charges and self-performed elements. The remaining period between now and the posted closing date of Feb. 08, 2021 does not afford sufficient time to re-solicit commodity quotes and essential subcontractor work packages with any certainty of achieving a reasonable coverage of competitive prices. We thus obliged to respectfully request a six (6) week time extension to the present submission date.

ANSWER: Proposal due date remains unchanged.