20-R-1334-Amd 0003.pdf

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

RFP N62742-20-R-1334, NAVFAC WORK ORDER NUMBER 1632562,FY21 MCAF P-3001/AJJY203001 APSI - STANDOFF WEAPONS

COMPLEX, MSA2, NADERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM

Amendment Nol. 0003 is continued on the next page.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 3

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 26-Oct-2020

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 N6274220R1334

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Sep-2020

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, X is not extended.

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

26-Oct-2020

CODE

HAND DELIVER

NAVFAC PACIFIC

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS BR (ACQ33)

4256 RADFORD DR, BLDG 62

HONOLULU HI 96818-3296

N62742 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

RFP No. N62742-20-R-1334 Amendment No. 0003

1632562

AMENDMENT No. 0003

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

This Amendment No. 0003 revises the RFP as follows:

DOCUMENT 00202, EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD.

Delete Document 00202 in its entirety and replace it with the attached revised Document 00202-AMENDMENT 0003. Revisions are indicated with a line in the right margin.

SPECIFICATIONS

SECTION 01 33 00 – SUBMITTALS

Remove Replace with Page 10 Page 10

SECTION 01 45 35 – SPECIAL INSPECTIONS

Remove Replace with

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS – MASM

& PTMX (Attachment)

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS – MASM

& PTMX (Attachment)

22 Pages 22 Pages

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS – ECM

(Attachment)

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS – ECM

(Attachment)

22 Pages 22 Pages

SECTION 01 57 19.01 20 – SUPPLEMENTAL TEMMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL

CONTROLS

Remove Replace with Pages 1 through 6 Pages 1 through 6

SECTION 01 57 19.03 – SUPPLEMENTAL TEMMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL

CONTROLS (JRM ESS)

Remove Replace with Pages 5 through 7 Pages 5 through 7

SECTION 01 78 00 – CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

Pages 1 through 4 Pages 1 through 4

SECTION 07 05 23 – PRESSURE TESTING AN AIR BARRIER SYSTEM FOR AIR

TIGHTNESS

Remove Replace with Pages 2 through 20 Pages 2 through 20

SECTION 07 57 12 – LIQUID APPLIED ELASTOMERIC SILICONE ROOFING

Remove Replace with Pages 10 through 12 Pages 10 through 12

SECTION 08 71 00 – DOOR HARDWARE

Pages 1 through 14 Pages 1 through 18

SECTION 32 13 13.06 – PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR ROADS

AND SITE FACILITIES

Remove Replace with Pages 2 through 18 Pages 2 through 18

See next page for listing of revisions to Drawings

DRAWINGS

The following drawings, bearing the revision date of 10/15/2020, supersede previously issued drawings bearing the same number and title:

DRAWING

NUMBER

NAVFAC

DRAWING NO.

REVISION

NUMBER

DRAWING TITLE

GB100 17250247 1 SCOPE OF WORK SITE PLAN

CG502 17250314 1 DRAINAGE DETAILS

CU501 17250356 1 UTILITY DETAILS

CU502 17250357 2 UTILITY DETAILS

SB131 17250368 1 PTMX – FOUNDATION PLAN

SF111 17250369 1 MASM – ROOF FRAMING PLAN

S-517 17250385 1 MASM – ROOF SECTIONS AND DETAILS

S-518 17250386 2 MASM – ROOF SECTIONS AND DETAILS

S-535 17250390 1 PTMX – ROOF SECTIONS AND DETAILS

AE111 17250400 1 MASM – PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN – AREA A

AE112 17250401 1 MASM – PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN – AREA B

AE121 17250406 1 MASM – PARTIAL ROOF PLAN – AREA A

AE140 17250409 1 PTMX – ROOF PLAN

AE151 17250411 2 ECM - ELECTRICAL YARD

A-613 17250441 2 MASM - DOOR FRAME SCHEDULE

A-631 17250445 2 PTMX - DOOR FRAME SCHEDULE

T-502 17250583 1 DETAILS

T-503 17250584 1 DETAILS

T-601 17250585 1 COMMUNICATION DIAGRAM / SCHEDULE

S-101E 17250590 1 FOUNDATION AND FLOOR PLAN

S-102E 17250591 1 ROOF FRAMING PLAN

S-303E 17250595 1 RETAINING WALL SECTION AND DETAILS

S-502E 17250597 1 PRECAST WALL PANEL DETAILS

S-503E 17250598 1 PRECAST ROOF PANELS

S-504E 17250599 1 WALL AND ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS

S-701E 17250600 1 DOOR FRAME ELEVATIONS AND DETAILS

S-702E 17250601 1 DOOR ELEVATIONS

S-703E 17250602 1 DOOR SECTIONS

FY21 MCAF P-3001/AJJY203001, APSI – WON 1632562

STANDOFF WEAPONS COMPLEX, MSA2

ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM

N62742-20-R-1334

DOCUMENT 00202

DOCUMENT 00202

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I. GENERAL

1.1. INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

1.2 COMPETITIVE RANGE

1.3 ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL

PART II. EVALUATION FACTORS / RATING SCHEME

2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

2.2 PRICE EVALUATION

2.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

2.4 RATING SCHEME

ATTACHMENTS

(A) Construction Experience Data Sheet

(B) NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0)

- AMENDMENT 0003

ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM

N62742-20-R-1334

DOCUMENT 00202

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

PART I. GENERAL

1.1 INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the initial proposal shall conform to the solicitation requirements and should contain the best offer from a technical and price standpoint.

Only the three (3) lowest-priced proposals will be evaluated for fair and reasonable pricing and technical acceptability. If none of the three (3) lowest-priced proposals are found to be technically acceptable, then the next three (3) lowest-priced proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability. If none of the six (6) lowest priced proposals are found to be technically acceptable, then all remaining proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability.

The Government intends to select the lowest reasonably priced technically acceptable offer and award a contract (within the funds available) without conducting discussions.

1.2 COMPETITIVE RANGE

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines discussions are necessary, the Contracting Officer may conduct discussions with offerors determined to be in the competitive range. The Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the most highly rated. If the Contracting Officer determines the number of proposals in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

1.3 ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL

The proposal must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation. The Government will rely on such information in the award of a contract. The awardee’s proposal will be incorporated into the contract and all items proposed will become binding requirements of the contract. By submission of the offer, the offeror agrees that all items proposed (e.g. subcontractors with teaming agreements, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions must be equal or better and will require prior approval by the Contracting Officer.

PART II. EVALUATION FACTORS / RATING SCHEME

2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

The contract resulting from this solicitation will be awarded to that responsible Offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the lowest evaluated price of proposals (within the funds available) meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for the technical evaluation factors. An overall technical factor rating must be at least “ACCEPTABLE” in order to be considered for award. An “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any factor will result in the overall technical proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions. An overall technical rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” will make a proposal ineligible for award.

2.2 PRICE EVALUATION

(a) One or more of the following techniques may be used to evaluate the total evaluated price to ensure that it is fair and reasonable:

Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation Comparison of proposed prices with the Independent Government Estimate

(b) The price proposals will be listed from lowest to highest.

(c) The price proposal will initially be evaluated separately from the technical proposal.

2.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

The following evaluation factors shall be used to evaluate the technical proposals.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 3: SAFETY

FACTOR 4: CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN

Factor 1 – Experience

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall complete the attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) for each project submitted and complete all individual blocks. Attachment A and all information therein is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to evaluate experience. The Government will evaluate only the information provided in Attachment A and all other information provided on other than Attachment A will not be considered.

The Offeror may expand individual blocks on the Attachment A; however, Attachment A for each project submitted shall not exceed a total of four (4) single-sided pages [or, two (2) double-sided pages], 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger. For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP.

Submit a maximum of five (5) construction projects that best demonstrates the offeror’s construction experience that are similar in size, scope, and complexity as provided in the RELEVANT CONSTRUCTION PROJECT definition below. If the offeror submits more than five (5) projects for evaluation, the Government will evaluate the first five (5) projects submitted and will disregard any other project information after the first five (5).

RELEVANT CONSTRUCTION PROJECT: For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant construction project is defined as a construction project that includes at least one of the following individual features:

(1) New construction of cast-in-place and/or precast reinforced concrete Earth Covered Magazine (ECM) or structures/buildings, where the structures/buildings or portions of the structure/building, contain hardened concrete construction to mitigate blast effects to provide protection for personnel or valuable equipment.

Construction dollar value must be approximately $5M or more in construction dollar value. The Offeror shall clearly indicate the dollar value associated with construction of the concrete ECM or hardened concrete construction of the structure/building to mitigate blast effects to provide protection for personnel or valuable equipment. For the purpose of determining relevancy, the dollar value of work associated with the concrete ECM or hardened concrete construction of the structure/building to mitigate blast effects to provide protection for personnel or valuable equipment is the relevant measure, not the value of the entire project submitted.

(2) New construction of a cast-in-place and/or precast reinforced concrete structure/building containing a high bay shop space (28 ft. height minimum). Construction dollar value must be approximately $10M or more in construction dollar value.

(3) New construction of concrete roads/pavement with minimum concrete pavement thickness of thirteen inches (13”). Construction dollar value must be approximately $5M or more in construction dollar value. The Offeror shall clearly indicate the dollar value associated with construction of the concrete road/pavement. For the purpose of determining relevancy, the dollar value of work associated with the concrete road/pavement is the relevant measure, not the value of the entire project submitted.

Each project submitted for evaluation must have been completed or substantially completed within the past fifteen (15) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Alteration, renovation, or repair will not be considered a relevant project. “Substantially completed” is defined as at least 90% physical completion by the date of solicitation issue.

NOTES:

1. The construction projects submitted shall collectively demonstrate experience in all individual features: (1) New construction of cast-in-place and/or precast reinforced concrete ECM or structures/buildings, where the structures/buildings or portions of the structure/building contain hardened concrete construction to mitigate blast effects to provide protection for personnel or valuable equipment, (2) New construction of a cast-in-place and/or precast reinforced concrete structure/building containing a high bay shop space (28 ft. height minimum), and (3) New construction of concrete roads/pavement with minimum concrete pavement thickness of thirteen inches (13”). Failure to demonstrate experience in all individual features shall be considered a deficiency and an unacceptable rating will be assigned for this factor. All individual features, or multiple individual features, do not have to be within a single project scope.

2. A relevant construction project is further defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

3. There is a clear distinction between “experience” and “past performance.” Experience is related to the types and amounts of projects previously accomplished. Past performance relates to how well a contractor has performed.

4. The “Offeror” is defined as the exact name in Block 14 of the Solicitation, Offer and Award (SF1442). If the Offeror is utilizing experience and past performance information of any entity other than (1) the Offeror; (2) if the Offeror is a joint venture, its joint venture partners jointly and severally liable for the contract; or (3) a firm that has been acquired by the Offeror and is now part of the Offeror (separate legal entities are not considered part of the Offeror), the Offeror shall provide in its proposal a fully-executed teaming agreement or other contractual agreement. The teaming agreement or other contractual agreement shall, at a minimum, (1) be signed by the Offeror and the other entity, (2) specifically reference this solicitation/contract, and (3) specify the work to be performed by the other entity such that it is clear that the other entity will be meaningfully involved in this contract. For item (3), clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the other entity in terms of the work it will specifically perform or manage in the performance of the contract at the worksite. Note that generalized statements concerning commitment of resources are not sufficient to demonstrate that an entity will be meaningfully involved in the performance of the contract. Examples of “generalized statements” include a commitment of resources merely based on an entity’s “access” to resources and other generalized statements such as an entity will “provide support and expertise on the project.” The government will only consider information provided in the teaming agreement for the purpose of determining whether the Offeror has clearly demonstrated that any entity (other than the Offeror and, if the offeror is a joint venture, its joint venture partners jointly and severally liable for the contract) will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. For experience and past performance information of a firm that has been acquired by the Offeror and is no longer a separate legal entity, the Offeror shall provide an explanation of the acquisition sufficient to demonstrate that the

ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM

N62742-20-R-1334

DOCUMENT 00202

predecessor firm is now part of the Offeror in Block 1 of Attachment A.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements and paragraph 2.4 below.

Factor 2 – Past Performance

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1 – Experience. If a completed CPARS or CCASS evaluation is not available, then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ – Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 2 – Experience. PPQs shall be completed and signed by the contracting agent and/or their representative responsible for construction contract administration. A PPQ shall not be from a prime contractor for work performed by a subcontractor. The Offeror shall provide completed PPQs in the proposal. Offerors may submit PPQs previously submitted for other solicitations as long as complete, required information is included.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues.

Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the offeror’s references or the references unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Performance awards, letters of appreciation, certificates, or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(b) Basis of Evaluation

The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Experience. In addition, the Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance on relevant projects from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of Contractors who are part of a partnership or joint venture identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance and will receive a Neutral rating. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a Neutral rating shall be considered “Acceptable.”

There is a clear distinction between “experience” and “past performance.” Experience is related to the types and amounts of projects previously accomplished. Past performance relates to how well a contractor has performed.

The basis of evaluation and acceptability will be as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements for Factor 2, and paragraph 2.4 below.

ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM

N62742-20-R-1334

DOCUMENT 00202

Factor 3 – Safety

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: For a partnership, joint venture, or LLC etc., separate TRC and DART Rate submittal requirements are required for each partner/member; however, only one safety narrative is required. If any Offeror/partner/LLC member has TRC and/or DART rates, then TRC and DART Rates shall not be submitted for any subcontractors or affiliates of that Offeror/partner/LLC member. If any Offeror/partner/LLC member does not have TRC and/or DART rates, provide an explanation as to why they are unable to provide them and submit TRC and DART information specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) below for the firm(s) that will be providing the on-site construction labor resources for that Offeror/partner/LLC member.

(1) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate and Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit the OSHA DART and TRC rates and supporting OSHA 300 log and OSHA Form 300A summary for the three previous complete calendar years (2019, 2018, and 2017). If an offeror does not have the OSHA DART and/or TRC rates, affirmatively state so, explain why, and submit equivalent DART and TRC rates based upon the OSHA formula shown below. Provide an explanation for any DART rate 2.0 or higher and the actions taken to prevent future occurrences. Provide an explanation for any TRC rate 3.5 or higher and the actions taken to prevent future occurrences. The following provides the OSHA formula for DART and TRC:

DART Rate:

The DART rate is calculated by adding up the number of incidents involving work related deaths, one or more Lost Days, one or more Restricted Days, or the transfer of an employee to a different job within the same company, multiplying that number by 200,000, and then dividing that number by the number of employee labor hours worked.

Total Number of DART incidents x 200,000 DART Rate = Number of employee labor hours worked

TRC Rate:

The TRC rate is calculated by multiplying the number of recordable cases by 200,000, and then dividing that number by the number of labor hours.

Total Number of Recordable Cases x 200,000 TRC Rate = Number of employee labor hours worked

“Recordable cases” include each work related death and each work related injury or occupational illness involving days away from work, restricted work, transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.

(2) Technical Approach for Safety: Describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. Submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work. Describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels. Additionally, describe the methodology to execute an effective program that utilizes sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps.

There is no page limitation to address paragraph (1) above. The narrative to address paragraph (2) above shall not exceed two (2) pages (single-sided, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger). (For a partnership, joint venture, or LLC etc., the mishap rates (DART, TRC) are required for each partner/member;

ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM

N62742-20-R-1334

DOCUMENT 00202

however, only one safety narrative is required. DART and TRC Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

Narrative pages shall contain the page number.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation and acceptability will be as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements for Factor 3, and paragraph 2.4 below.

Factor 4 – Construction Management Plan

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror (as identified on the SF1442) shall provide (1) a detailed narrative of their management plan limited to three (3) single-sided pages, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, 10-point font or larger, and (2) a proposed construction schedule not to exceed ten (10) single-sided pages (11” x 17”). At a minimum, the following shall be addressed:

(1) Management Plan:

a. Management Structure: Describe the proposed management structure for this contract, and strategy for managing the project and effectively coordinating and performing the work to effectively execute the project.

Describe the roles, lines of authority, and responsibility of each entity and key personnel. Discuss planned sources of labor for the prime contractor and key subcontractors, sources of procurement of major equipment and materials, and the Offeror’s strategy for managing sub-contractors.

b. Plan for sequencing of work to minimize impacts from construction activities on munitions and flight operations. Include/Discuss provisions that address contractor's understanding of the various project requirements including construction in high security areas (munitions and active flightline), multiple construction sites with road construction to connect the sites to the flightline, Munitions and Explosives of Concern (MEC) clearance activities, and maintaining continuous access to Munitions Storage Area 2 (MSA2) during construction.

(2) Proposed construction schedule: Submit a critical path method construction schedule, assuming the contract will be awarded on 31 March 2021, that demonstrates the Offeror’s strategy to ensure successful completion of the project within the time specified and illustrates the Offeror’s understanding of the important elements of the project. The assumed award date is stated for proposal evaluation purposes only and does not infer or guarantee that an award will be made by that date. The schedule shall, at a minimum, consider the following:

- Mobilization date

- Construction start date

- Major items of work

- Construction completion date

Note: The performance period proposed by the Offeror cannot exceed the time for completion specified in Document 00700 FAR 52.211-10 Commencement, Prosecution, and completion of Work of the solicitation.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The Offeror’s construction management plan will be evaluated for completeness in addressing each of the submittal requirements discussed above.

The basis of evaluation and acceptability will be as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements for Factor 4, and paragraph 2.4 below.

ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM

N62742-20-R-1334

DOCUMENT 00202

2.4 RATING SCHEME

The following information is pertinent to the rating of the technical proposals:

(a) Deficiency: A material failure of the proposal to meet a Government requirement.

(b) If the proposal contains an “UNACCEPTABLE” rating for any of the Factors, the overall rating of the technical proposal will be “UNACCEPTABLE.” An overall technical rating of “UNACCEPTABLE makes a proposal ineligible for award.

FACTORS 1, 3, AND 4:

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

FACTOR 2:

ACCEPTABLE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

UNACCEPTABLE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

DOCUMENT 00202 – ATTACHMENT A

ATTACHMENT A

CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

Project No. (check one): CON #1 CON #2 CON #3 CON #4 CON #5

1. Name of Entity that Performed Project*: _________________________________________________

Address: ________________________________________

Phone Number: __________________________________ Entity Identifier (DUNS #): __________________________

Point of Contact: _________________________________ Contact Phone Number: _____________________________

a. If the firm that performed the project has been acquired by the Offeror and is no longer a separate legal entity, the Offeror shall provide an explanation of the acquisition sufficient to demonstrate that the predecessor firm is now part of the Offeror.

b. Name of Entity that Performed Work that Experience is Claimed for* (i.e.; if the project was performed by a J/V and

Offeror is claiming experience of one of the J/V members that performed work on the project, state the exact legal name of the JV member the Offeror claims experience for): __________________________________________________________

Address: ________________________________________

Phone Number: ___________________________________ Entity Identifier (DUNS #): __________________________

Point of Contact: __________________________________ Contact Phone Number: _____________________________

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain)

Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Number: Delivery/Task Order Number:

Project Title:

Project Location:

4. Construction Award Date (mm/dd/yy): Construction Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

5. Type of Work: New Construction Renovation Repair Alteration Other (explain):

6. Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Firm-Fixed Price Cost/Time and Material Other (explain):

DOCUMENT 00202 – ATTACHMENT A

Complete Block 7 for Construction Projects.

7. Construction Project:

Construction Award Amount: $__________________________ Final Construction Price: $________________________

Type of Contract/Task Order: (Check ALL that apply)

Design-Build Design-Bid-Build Delivery/Task Order (IDIQ) Other (explain):

If Design-Build, identify the Lead Design Firm: ____________________________________________________________

8. Provide a detailed description of the project and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e.: relevant features, square footage, construction methods), including any sustainable features or USGBC LEED certifications. If design-build, include a description of the design-effort.

ATTACHMENT B

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information

Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: Entity Identifier Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain)

Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information

Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine

How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information

Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL

SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO NAVFAC WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION

ON NAVFAC SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO NAVFAC. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR NAVFAC POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT

RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

N62742-20-R-1334

DOCUMENT 00202 – ATTACHMENT B

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the

Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the

Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the

Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the

Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not

Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

Contractor Information (Firm Name):

Client Information (Name):

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff

(including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

Contractor Information (Firm Name):

Client Information (Name):

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues?

(Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations

(including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks.

Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

±°↔ ↓↓≥ƒ ↔•≡ ⇐°±↔↑…↔°↑← ↓↓↑°♥≥ ←↔″↓ ↔° ↔•≡ ≈°…♠″≡±↔ ∂↔←≡≥≠⌠ ♠↔ ↔° ←≡↓↑↔≡ ←•≡≡↔ ……°″↓±ƒ∂±÷ ↔•≡ ≈°…♠″≡±↔〉

←•°↓ ≈↑♦∂±÷←〉 ∠±≥ƒ ↔•°←≡ ≈↑♦∂±÷← ↑≡→♠≡←↔≡≈ ↔° ↓↑≡↓↑≡ ←•°↓ ≈↑♦∂±÷← ♦∂≥≥ ≡ ↓↑°♥∂≈≡≈〉 ⊄•≡←≡ ≈↑♦∂±÷← ↑≡ ↓↑°♥∂≈≡≈ °±≥ƒ ≠↔≡↑ ♦↑≈〉

⇔↔ …°±↔∂±≡≈ °± ↔•≡←≡ ≡≥≡…↔↑°±∂… ≠∂≥≡← ″♠←↔ ±°↔ ≡ ♠←≡≈ ≠°↑ ±ƒ ↓♠↑↓°←≡ ↔•≡ ↑≡≠≡↑≡±…≡≈ ↓↑°∝≡…↔〉 ⇒±ƒ °↔•≡↑ ♠←≡ °↑ ↑≡♠←≡ ∂← ↔ ↔•≡ ←°≥≡ ↑∂←× °≠ ↔•≡ ⇐°±↔↑…↔°↑ ±≈ ♦∂↔•°♠↔ ≥∂∂≥∂↔ƒ °↑ ≥≡÷≥ ≡♣↓°←♠↑≡ ↔° ↔•≡ ¬°♥≡↑±″≡±↔〉 ⊄•≡ ƒ ≥♦ ±ƒ …≥∂″ °↑ …♠←≡ °≠ …↔∂°± °≠ ±ƒ ±↔♠↑≡ ÷∂±←↔ ↔•≡ ¬°♥≡↑±″≡±↔⌠ ∂↔← ÷≡±↔←⌠ °↑ ∂↔← ←♠…°±←♠≥↔±↔← ↔•↔ ″ƒ ↑∂←≡ °♠↔ °≠ °↑ ∂± …°±±≡…↔∂°± ≠♠≥≥≡←↔ ≡♣↔≡±↔ ↓≡↑″∂↔↔≡≈ ƒ ≥♦⌠ ∂±≈≡″±∂≠ƒ ±≈ •°≥≈ ↔•≡ ¬°♥≡↑±″≡±↔ ↔↔°↑±≡ƒ← ≠≡≡← ±≈ ≈≡≠≡±←≡ …°←↔←⌠ ↑∂←∂±÷ °♠↔ °≠ °↑ ↑≡←♠≥↔∂±÷ ≠↑°″ ↔•≡

⇔∂≠≠≡↑≡±…≡← ″ƒ ≡♣∂←↔ ≡↔♦≡≡± ↔•≡ ←°♠↑…≡ ≈↑♦∂±÷ ≠∂≥≡← ±≈ ↔•≡ ↑≡↓↑≡←≡±↔↔∂°± ↑≡÷↑≈∂±÷ ↔•≡ ……♠↑…ƒ °↑ …°″↓≥≡↔≡±≡←← °≠ ↔•≡ ≡≥≡…↔↑°±∂… ←°♠↑…≡ ≈↑♦∂±÷ ≠∂≥≡←⌠ ±°↑ ≈°≡← ∂↔ ″×≡ ↑≡↓↑≡←≡±↔↔∂°± ↔° ↔•≡ …°″↓↔∂∂≥∂↔ƒ ∂← ↑≡←↓°±←∂≥≡ ≠°↑ ≈≡↔≡↑″∂±∂±÷ ∂≠ ±ƒ …°±≠≥∂…↔ ≡♣∂←↔←〉 √± ↔•≡ ≡♥≡±↔ ↔•↔ ↓↑≡↓↑≡≈ ƒ ↔•≡ ¬°♥≡↑±″≡±↔ ±≈ ↔•≡ ≠♠↑±∂←•≡≈ ←°♠↑…≡ ≈↑♦∂±÷ ≠∂≥≡←⌠ ↔•≡ ≈↑♦∂±÷ ≠∂≥≡← ≈°≡← ±°↔ ↑≡≥∂≡♥≡ ↔•≡ ⇐°±↔↑…↔°↑ °≠ ↔•≡ ≈♠↔ƒ ↔° ≠♠≥≥ƒ …°″↓≥ƒ

∧°↑″ ≈≡←…↑∂≡≈ ♦∂↔•∂±〉 ∇″≡ ↔•≡ ≡≥≡…↔↑°±∂… ←♠″∂↔↔≥ ≠∂≥≡ ←↓≡…∂≠∂…≥≥ƒ ↔•≡ ⇐°±↔↑…↔∂±÷ ∠≠≠∂…≡↑〉 ∨≥≡…↔↑°±∂… ≠∂≥≡← ″♠←↔ ≡ °≠ ←♠≠≠∂…∂≡±↔ →♠≥∂↔ƒ °↔•≡↑♦∂←≡ ←↓≡…∂≠∂≡≈ °↑ ≈∂↑≡…↔≡≈ ƒ ↔•≡ ⇐°±↔↑…↔∂±÷ ∠≠≠∂…≡↑〉 ¬≡±≡↑↔≡ ∉⇔∧

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS (UFGS 01 45 35) REVISED FOR IBC 2015 ON 9/30/16

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS – MASM & PTMX

Reference UFGS 01 45 35 for all requirements not noted as part of this schedule.

INSPECTION DEFINITIONS:

PERFORM: Perform these tasks for each weld, fastener or bolted connection, and noted verification.

OBSERVE: Observe these items randomly during the course of each work day to insure that applicable requirements are being met. Operations need not be delayed pending these inspections at contractor’s risk.

DOCUMENT: Document, with a report, that the work has been performed in accordance with the contract documents. This is in addition to any other reports required in the Special Inspections guide specification.

CONTINUOUS: Constant monitoring of identified tasks by a special inspector over the duration of performance of said tasks.

A. STRUCTURAL - STEEL – WELDING SECTION

THIS SECTION APPLICABLE IF BOX IS CHECKED: ☒

STEEL INSPECTION PRIOR TO WELDING – VERIFY THE FOLLOWING ARE IN COMPLIANCE

IBC 1705.2.1, AISC 360-16: Table C-N5.4-1

TASK INSPECTION TYPE1 DESCRIPTION

1. Verify that the welding procedures specification (WPS) is available

PERFORM

2. Verify manufacturer certifications for welding consumables are available

PERFORM

3. Verify material identification PERFORM Type and grade.

4. Welder Identification System

PERFORM The fabricator or erector, as applicable, shall maintain a system by which a welder who has welded a joint or member can be identified. Stamps, if used, shall be the low-stress type.

5. Fit-up of groove welds (including joint geometry)

OBSERVE ✓ Joint preparation

✓ Dimensions (alignment, root opening, root face, bevel)

✓ Cleanliness (condition of steel surfaces)

✓ Tacking (tack weld quality and location)

✓ Backing type and fit (if applicable)

1 PERFORM: Perform these tasks for each weld, fastener or bolted connection, and required verification.

OBSERVE: Observe these items on a random sampling basis daily to insure that applicable requirements are met. Operations need not be delayed pending these inspections at contractor’s risk.

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS (UFGS 01 45 35) REVISED FOR IBC 2015 ON 9/30/16

6. Configuration and finish of access holes

OBSERVE

7. Fit-up of fillet welds OBSERVE ✓ Dimensions (alignment, gaps at root)

✓ Cleanliness (condition of steel surfaces)

✓ Tacking (tack weld quality and location)

STEEL INSPECTION DURING WELDING – VERIFY THE FOLLOWING ARE IN COMPLIANCE

IBC 1705.2.1, AISC 360-16: Table C-N5.4-2

TASK INSPECTION TYPE DESCRIPTION

8. Use of qualified welders PERFORM Welding by welders, welding operators, and tack welders who are qualified in conformance with requirements.

9. Control and handling of welding consumables

OBSERVE ✓ Packaging

✓ Electrode atmospheric exposure control

10. No welding over cracked tack welds

OBSERVE

11. Environmental conditions OBSERVE ✓ Wind speed within limits

✓ Precipitation and temperature

12. Welding Procedures Specification followed

OBSERVE ✓ Settings on welding equipment

✓ Travel speed

✓ Selected welding materials

✓ Shielding gas type/flow rate

✓ Preheat applied

✓ Interpass temperature maintained (min./max.)

✓ Proper position (F, V, H, OH)

✓ Intermix of filler metals avoided

13. Welding techniques OBSERVE ✓ Interpass and final cleaning

✓ Each pass within profile limitations

✓ Each pass meets quality requirements

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS (UFGS 01 45 35) REVISED FOR IBC 2015 ON 9/30/16

A. STRUCTURAL - STEEL – WELDING SECTION (CONTINUED)

STEEL INSPECTION AFTER WELDING – VERIFY THE FOLLOWING ARE IN COMPLIANCE

IBC 1705.2.1, AISC 360-16: Table C-N5.4-3

TASK INSPECTION TYPE 1 DESCRIPTION

14. Welds cleaned OBSERVE

15. Size, length, and location of all welds

PERFORM Size, length, and location of all welds conform to the requirements of the detail drawings.

16. Welds meet visual acceptance criteria

PERFORM AND

DOCUMENT

✓ Crack prohibition

✓ Weld/base-metal fusion

✓ Crater cross section

✓ Weld profiles

✓ Weld size

✓ Undercut

✓ Porosity

17. Arc strikes PERFORM

18. k-area PERFORM When welding of doubler plates, continuity plates or stiffeners has been performed in the k-area, visually inspect the web k-area for cracks.

19. Backing removed, weld tabs removed and finished, and fillet welds added where required

PERFORM

20. Repair activities PERFORM AND

DOCUMENT

21. Document acceptance or rejection of welded joint or member

PERFORM

END SECTION

1 PERFORM: Perform these tasks for each weld, fastener or bolted connection, and required verification.

DOCUMENT: Document in a report that the work has been performed as required. This is in addition to all other required reports.

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS (UFGS 01 45 35) REVISED FOR IBC 2015 ON 9/30/16

B. STRUCTURAL - STEEL – BOLTING SECTION

STEEL INSPECTION TASKS PRIOR TO BOLTING – VERIFY THE FOLLOWING ARE IN COMPLIANCE

IBC 1705.2.1, AISC 360-16: Table C-N5.6-1

TASK INSPECTION TYPE 1 DESCRIPTION

1. Manufacture’s certifications available for fastener materials

PERFORM

2. Fasteners marked in accordance with ASTM requirements

OBSERVE

3. Proper fasteners selected for joint detail (grade, type, bolt length if threads are to be excluded from shear plane)

OBSERVE

4. Proper bolting procedure selected for joint detail

OBSERVE

5. Connecting elements, including appropriate faying surface condition and hole preparation, if specified, meet applicable requirements

OBSERVE

6. Proper storage provided for bolts, nuts, washers, and other fastener components

OBSERVE

STEEL INSPECTION TASKS DURING BOLTING – VERIFY THE FOLLOWING ARE IN COMPLIANCE

IBC 1705.2.1, AISC 360-16: Table C-N5.6-2

TASK INSPECTION TYPE 1 DESCRIPTION

7. Fastener assemblies of suitable condition, placed in all holes and washers (if required) are positioned as required

OBSERVE

8. Joint brought to the snug-tight condition prior to pretensioning operation

OBSERVE

9. Fastener component not turned by the wrench prevented from rotating

OBSERVE

10. Bolts are pretensioned in accordance with RCSC Specification, progressing systematically from the most rigid point toward the free edges

OBSERVE

STEEL INSPECTION TASKS AFTER BOLTING – VERIFY THE FOLLOWING ARE IN COMPLIANCE

IBC 1705.2.1, AISC 360-16: Table C-N5.6-3

TASK INSPECTION TYPE 1 DESCRIPTION

11. Document acceptance or rejection of all bolted connections

1 PERFORM: Perform these tasks for each weld, fastener or bolted connection, and required verification.

OBSERVE: Observe these items on a random sampling basis daily to insure that applicable requirements are met. Operations need not be delayed pending these inspections at contractor’s risk.

DOCUMENT: Document in a report that the work has been performed as required. This is in addition to all other required reports.

SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS (UFGS 01 45 35) REVISED FOR IBC 2015 ON 9/30/16

C. STRUCTURAL - STEEL - NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTING SECTION

NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING…