24R1304 Note 2.pdf

Notice No. 2

2 February 2024

PRE-PROPOSAL QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

RFP N62742-24-R-1304

FY24 AYHN239001 (P-9001) PDI TRANSIENT AIRCRAFT

PARKING APRON, BASA AIR BASE, PHILIPPINES

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 24 JANUARY 2024

1. P9001_Specifications, Page 28, Section 3.11, MUNITIONS AND EXPLOSIVES OF

CONCERN (MEC)/MATERIAL POTENTIALLY PRESENTING AN EXPLOSIVE HAZARD

(MPPEH) states: "The project site is assumed to be an area with moderate (yellow) or high (red) probability areas of encountering MEC/MPPEH. Perform full clearance ahead of construction in accordance the Munitions Response (MR) Explosive Safety Submission (ESS) included in Section 01 57 19.03 20 SUPPLEMENTAL TEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS Munitions Response Explosives Safety Submission (MRESS) Basa Air Base Construction Support.”

The MRESS contains critical explosives safety procedures that governs the MEC/MPPEH clearance operations for the P9001 site. It is requested that the government provides the MRESS for this project as soon as possible and allows the Contractors additional time during the proposal phase to assess explosives safety procedures and incorporate all the MRESS requirements.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

6. P9001 Specifications, Page 14, Section 3.7 states: "Soil Excavation and Removal Soil excavation and removal shall be in accordance with the Construction Support MRESS and NAVSEA OP 5. Prior to reuse of excavated soil where limited clearance ahead of construction is utilized the soil must be additionally screened to remove 20mm TOI. Screening may be done manually (spread into 6" layers, detect, and remove) or mechanically, using a 2-inch screen for 60mm and 0.75-inch screen for 20mm, observing all explosive safety precautions as required by the Construction ESS.”

a. Request additional clarification on the definition of “limited clearance” ahead of construction or that the Government immediately provides the MRESS as it contains needed details on the clearance effort.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND, PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DRIVE, SUITE 100

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR HICKAM, HAWAII 96860-3134

7. P9001 Specifications, Page 6, Section 1.6, MEC Work Plan General Requirements states:

"Once accepted by the Contracting Officer, the MEC Work Plan and attachments will be enforced as part of the contract. Only when the MEC Work Plan is accepted shall the contractor be permitted to begin remediation activities. Contractor's failure to execute work in accordance with the approved ESS or MEC Work Plan will be cause for non-compliance with the contract.

Any costs or delays associated with full resolution will be the contractor's responsibility.”

P9001 Specifications, Page 7, Section 1.9.1 Daily Quality Control (QC) Reports states "The QC Report shall include the WGS 1984 UTM Zone55 North coordinate system used, elevation, description of grids/area included in the report, depth of clearance, number of anomalies investigated, weight in pounds of debris recovered, number of MEC found, number of MPPEH found, number of blind seeds placed, number of blind seeds recovered and IVS results."

The performance metrics and failure criteria play significant role in overall project cost, schedule, MEC/MPPEH clearance technical approach, and applicable technologies to meet the overall project requirements. Request the Government define the performance metrics and failure criteria for the MEC/MPPEH clearance for this project.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

8. P9001 Specifications, ATTACHMENTS 1-12: MEC fieldwork Templates. Request the Government provide fillable version of the following 12 templates:

Attch 1_MEC Daily Site Report template Attch 2_MEC SPOT Report Attch 3_MEC Safety Meeting template Attch 4_MEC Safety Insp Form template Attch 5_MEC Sensor Assembly Checklist template Attch 6_MEC Geophysical Equipment Checkout template Attch 7_MEC QC Seeding Table template Attch 8_MEC QCQA Inspection Report template Attch 9_MEC Grid Completion Form template Attch 10_MEC Accountability Log template Attch 11_MEC Site Visitor Log template Attch 12_MEC Survey Deviation Report template

ANSWER: Response deferred.

9. General. There will be commercial equipment (geophysical sensor platform, metal detectors, etc.) from the US that will be utilized on this project to facilitate the MEC clearance ahead of construction effort. Will NAVFAC issue a letter of Tax Relief to the Contractor for this project?

ANSWER: No, a letter of Tax Relief will not be provided by NAVFAC or the US Embassy to support this project. As of now, no VAT exemptions will be processed and proposals shall include all VAT and other applicable taxes. If an exemption is given in post award, a deductive modification will be processed by the US Government to recapture any credit.

11. P9001_Specifications, Page 9, Section 3.1 (Data Collection prior to Intrusive Activities) states: "Prior to commencing intrusive activities, the contractor shall conduct a 100% initial MEC data collection of the project site using a positioning system and DGM and/or AGC equipment."

How many acres will require 100% DGM/AGC survey?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

12. P9001_Specifications, Page 15, Section 1.6 (MEC Work Plan General Requirements) states: "Submit the MEC Work Plan within 30 calendar days of Contract Award."

Request the Government provide a list of Government entities that will be reviewing the project required submittals (plans and reports) to include their review period (in calendar days) that will need to be accounted for in the overall project schedule and contractual period of performance.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

18. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.1 (a): “The minimum requirements for the Concrete Paving CQC Manager consist of 8 years airfield concrete paving experience similar to work required under this contract with a minimum of 3 years in a concrete paving CQC role.” Please verify if this experience must be on DOD airfields or if FAA or regional airfield experience will count.

Also, there is a requirement for the CQC manager to be either a graduate engineer or a graduate construction manager. This combination of experience can be difficult to find, especially for remote work. Can the government verify that the full extent of these requirements will be upheld during construction?

ANSWER: FAA and regional airfield experience will count for the eight years. The CQC manager that must be a graduate engineer or graduate construction manager is a different person than the Concrete Paving CQC Manager. Reference Specification Section 01 45 00.00 20, para

1.5.1.2. Yes, the full requirements will be upheld.

19. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.1 (e): Stipulates a batch plant manufacturer representative must be on site to inspect and adjust the plant. Given the location of the project this could be difficult to procure the expertise. Is this inspection required prior to the start of paving?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

20. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.1 (g): Stipulates a slip form paver manufacturer representative must be on site to inspect and adjust the plant. Given the location of the project this could be difficult to procure the expertise. Is this inspection required prior to the start of paving?

21. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.2 (b): Survey work is required to be performed under the supervision of a licensed surveyor. Does this mean a licensed surveyor must be on site for the duration of paving?

ANSWER: Supervision is determined by the licensed surveyor. He/She needs to be on-site as necessary to certify the survey.

22. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.3: All sampling and testing is required to be performed by an onsite accredited laboratory. Transporting and accrediting a laboratory for this scope of work can take upwards of 6 months. Will the government provide the time necessary to deliver and accredit the laboratory? Will this requirement be waived for remote work?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

23. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.6: This paragraph states: “Use the same equipment, materials, and construction techniques on test sections proposed for use in all subsequent work.” Does this mean that hand place and fixed for test sections are required in addition to pilot and fill-in lane test sections? What about companion or step and slip lanes?

ANSWER: Yes, test lanes must be used to verify all work procedures prior to placing concrete on the airfield; yes, concrete placement procedures must be followed for companion or step lanes.

24. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.6: This paragraph states: “Construct test sections meeting all specification requirements.” Is this interpreted to mean that if for example a single slump test is out of tolerance or a single measurement on joint face deviation does not meet requirements, then the test section is considered a failure? For example, if the contractor sets a single form on a pilot lane – say to accommodate side plane adjustment when taking off from existing concrete – there will almost always be a slight abrupt change. This is easily remediated with hand grinding, but will this situation be considered a failure on a test section?

ANSWER: Yes, if a single slump test is out of tolerance or a single measurement on joint face deviation does not meet requirements then the test section is considered a failure. The situation described will be considered a failure on the test section.

25. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.6.1(c): Paragraph language says to construct a pilot lane test section up to 15 but not more than 60 days prior to start of construction. Please confirm how long the review process of the test section will take for scheduling purposes? Does the contractor need to plan a 60-day break for test section acceptance?

ANSWER: Refer to section 01 33 00 para. 1.10. Reviews will be completed within the longer of 30 calendar days or 21 working days after the date of submission. Yes, contractor needs to plan a 60-day break for test section acceptance.

26. Section 32 13 14.13, para 1.4.6.3: Does the fill-in lane test section require two existing lanes as forms, or is step-and-slip construction on one edge considered acceptable?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

33. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.6: Will the contractor be required to desalinate their own water for concrete production?

ANSWER: Yes, if the source water has salt in it the contractor will be required to desalinate it.

34. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.6: Water listed for use in the concrete paving has specific testing requirements. Is the contractor expected to obtain water samples of the available island water prior to commencing with mixture proportioning?

ANSWER: Yes, the water samples are needed prior to mixture proportioning.

35. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.6: Will the contractor be expected to use local water for the mix design study?

ANSWER: The same water that will be used in construction must be the same water used in the mix design study.

38. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.12.1.2: This paragraph requires batch plant to be capable of 200 cubic meters per hour of concrete production. How will this be verified, and will this requirement be enforced on the project.

ANSWER: Manufacturer documentation must be provided to the QC Manager to verify this.

Yes, it will be enforced.

46. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.12.5.1: The vibrator monitoring system on the slip form paver has an internal and external component. The external component is typically used for downloading data after the shift is complete, but the component internal to the paver shows the operator the required information at the same time. Is this requirement intending that the external component be 100% functional for the duration of each placement? Also, vibrator sensors are notorious for going offline randomly. If vibrator performance can be seen on the machine console, but sensor failure causes data not to be sent to the external component, is this considered cause for discontinuation of paving as noted in this paragraph? Based on the reliability of these sensors this has potential to impact scheduled as sensors cannot be repaired without removing the vibrator from the gang mount on the paver.

ANSWER: Yes, component needs to be 100% functional. Yes, this will be considered a cause for discontinuation.

47. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.12.5.4: What is considered mainline paving and what portions of the project are clary screeds, rotating tube floats, and bridge deck finishers allowed?

ANSWER: Mainline paving refers to straight portions of the apron. Clary screeds, rotating tube floats, and bridge deck finishers are only allowed on irregular or odd-shaped slabs subject to approval.

48. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.12.5.5: In an earlier section steel forms were apparently not required. Will slip form paving over wood or composite forms be allowed?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

50. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.12.8: Are ride-a-saws permitted for initial and widening joint installation, or are hand-operated saws only permitted?

ANSWER: Ride-a-saws will be permitted given they meet all requirements in Spec 32 13 14.13 Section 2.12.8.

51. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.12.10: Can the government provide a definition for self-propelled? Is the workbridge required to have a motor and move without human support?

ANSWER: Includes wheels and is easily moved. Static scaffolding is not acceptable. Yes, work bridge must be self-propelled.

53. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.13.4: Slump requirements are 50mm maximum at point of placement. Typically hand placements are allowed to be placed at slightly higher slump. Can hand placement mixes be allowed to place concrete at 3” slump max?

ANSWER: Hand placement mixes are allowed to be placed at 75mm slump. See Spec 32 13

14.13 Section 2.13.4 Table 12.

54. Section 32 13 14.13, para 2.13.6: Strength correlations for this project are compressive to flexural. This methodology requires not only an age correlation but a simultaneous test method correlation. By using a flexural-to-flexural correlation, variability in test results can typically be reduced. Will a flexural-to-flexural correlation be allowed for this project?

ANSWER: No.

56. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.3.1: What is the criteria for exposed surface coarse aggregate that is used to determine rejection of rain damaged concrete? Furthermore, who is making this decision? This particular criteria appears very subjective and the contractor should know ahead of time how this will be adjudicated during construction. Setting clear criteria is beneficial for both the contractor and government and helps top prevent project delays which could occur due to differential expectation.

ANSWER: QC Manager will determine if exposed surface coarse aggregate is rain damaged.

58. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.4: The current language reads that paving equipment must be CAPABLE of continuous uniform forward movement of the paver of not less than 0.8 meters per minute. Please confirm that this is a capability statement and not an execution statement.

ANSWER: No, this is an execution statement. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.4 states, “Maintain a continuous, uniform forward movement of the paver of not less than 0.8m per minute.”

59. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.4: The current language reads that paving equipment must be CAPABLE of continuous uniform forward movement of the paver of not less than 0.8 meters per minute. This capability depends not only on the mechanical specifications of the paver, but also of the batch plant, the haul trucks, the transfer and placing equipment, staffing and staff capability, and the control system used to steer and align the paver. How will the government determine CAPABILITY of forward movement for this requirement?

ANSWER: Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.4 states, “Maintain a continuous, uniform forward movement of the paver of not less than 0.8m per minute.” The QC Manager will verify speed.

60. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.5.5.1: This section requires steel forms for fixed form paving, which seems to contradict paragraph 2.11. Please advise if steel forms are required for fixed forming. Also, please confirm that wood planks are allowed for use in building up forms from the bottom, as this seems atypical.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

61. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.5.7.1: The main apron PCCP section is 340 mm. Will reinforcing steel be required to be placed by the strike method? In slipform paving this requires two paving machines – the first to strike the initial concrete for setting of reinforcement and the second to complete the paving section. The answer to this question is of critical nature for planning and acquisition purposes, and it speaks ot the need to bring additional equipment to the island. All bidders should have a clear answer as to whether or not the government will require the strike method during construction. This is a significant variable which materially impacts the ability to bid the job and/or the costs thereof. By providing a clear and direct response (yes or no) all bidders will be on equal footing in submitting their respective bids.

ANSWER: Contractor owns the means and methods of production. The reinforcing steel must be placed to meet the requirements in Spec 32 13 14.13 Section 3.5.7.1.

62. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.5.7.2: As the primary apron section PCCP for this project is 340mm thickness, will the method for using chairs to support reinforcing mats on reinforced panels be acceptable?

ANSWER: Contractor owns the means and methods of production. The reinforcing steel must be placed to meet the requirements in Spec 32 13 14.13 Section 3.5.7.

63. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.7.2: The section on curing only specifies a single pass application of curing compound on the main apron section by mechanical means. Many studies have shown that a two-pass application helps significantly in minimizing pinholes, and discontinuity and providing a more uniform final coverage. Can a two-pass application be utilized for this project when applying by mechanical means?

ANSWER: Yes.

64. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.8.4: Are zip strips allowed for use in expansion and/or slip joints?

ANSWER: No.

66. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.9.3: For cracks in new concrete not exceeding 50mm is high molecular weight methacrylate acceptable in lieu of epoxy injection of these areas? A gravity feed method of low viscosity materials would eliminate the need for drilling injection ports in new concrete.

ANSWER: The QC Manager will determine if this material is acceptable.

67. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.9.4: Spalled edges are noted to have the panel replaced if more than 15.0% of any longitudinal or transverse joint edge is spalled. Is the intent to quantify removal and replacement criteria by a single edge or by the entire panel edge? For example: If a single PCCP panel which has four sides contains a single edge (one of the four sides) that has more than 15% of that edge spalled, and the other three edges have zero spalls this panel would be removed and replaced? Conversely, if that same panel had 10% spalls on each of the four edges it would remain in place and all four edges would be repaired? In other words, is the spall criteria specific to a single edge of the panel or the entirety of the panel edge around its perimeter?

69. Section 32 13 14.13, para 3.12.4: How many flexural tests are required to quantify that concrete has attained 3.8MPa flexural strength by field cure in order to allow for construction equipment on new concrete after seven days? Is a single set of testing from the original placement sufficient, or should the contractor prepare for more testing?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

81. RFP Document, page 65/84 (a) states the period of performance is 697 calendar days. After review of the contract documents, this duration is extremely short, sufficient only for the parking apron physical construction. It does not appear that the duration for the CLIN 001AB MECC has been taken into consideration in the POP. Our initial estimate based on the current MECC documents made available is that the POP for the MECC work will take approx. 17 months. This duration would need to be added to the 697 days allocated so far. Can the Gov please revise the POP to account for the MECC work or advise on the Gov understanding of the proposed 697 days in regards to MECC work and construction work.

ANSWER: The RFP remains unchanged; MECC work is accounted for in the POP.

84. Specification section 01 11 00, para 1.5 Excavation- para states: “Contact local utility locating service…” This service is not available in the Philippines. Historically this service is performed by the Base CESO department. Can the Government confirm that Basa CESO will provide existing utility drawings and location services prior to start of MECC and construction.

ANSWER: Confirmed Base CESO department will provide existing utility drawings and location services prior to start of MECC and construction.

85. Specification section 01 14 00 para 1.2 sub para e states: “The small arms practice range west of the project site has regular working hours of 1500-1800.” Is the contractor to sop work on-site for safety reasons when the range is in use? If yes, how many stoppages should be assumed for in planning.

ANSWER: Yes, for safety purposes, we cannot allow simultaneous construction work and the use of the small range arms range. With the construction ongoing, PAF will limit the use of small arms range during weekends when there is no construction. This will be included in Specification 01 14 00 in a forthcoming amendment.

86. Specification section 01 14 00 para 1.3.4 Exclusionary Period, states: “No work to be performed during the PAF anniversaries of 3 July and the Balikatan exercise 20 days.” This means that approx. 44 days will be lost from the schedule in total. In this type of work, this is a huge amount of schedule to be excluded. Can the Government add these days to the POP to account for the loss? Also, is the contractor expected to demobilize during the Balikatan exercise? How is de-mob and re-mob and stand-by time costs to be accounted for in the bid?

ANSWER: The RFP remains unchanged; no additional days will be added to the POP. No mob/demob required as exercises will use Taxiways A, B, C, and portion of E that is not closed for construction. No costs accounted for in bid as no mob/demob required.

87. Specification section 01 13 00 para 1.11 states: “Contractor shall host a partnering session within 45 calendar days of contract award,” but para 1.11.1 says hold the partnering session within 35 days of contract award. Please clarify which is correct.

ANSWER: Contractor must host a partnering session within 35 calendar days, Specification Section 01 30 00, will be revised in a forthcoming amendment.

89. Specification section 01 31 23.13 20 ECMs. There is no way to get a hard wire internet service on Basa Air Base due, contractors have to source mobile router type internet that is very slow and cumbersome. In similar locations, due to the complications with upload and download of data to ECMs and how this can be effected by the slow internet speed which can lead to documents not being received by the Government and contractor, this requirement has been waived in lieu of traditional email protocols. Considering that the project site will have extremely slow internet, can the Government waiver the requirement to use ECMs.

ANSWER: No, follow contract requirements.

90. Specification section 01 32 17.00 20 para 1.2.2 states: “The acceptance of the baseline NAS is a condition precedent to…’ The list does not include the primary activity that must occur before any construction—the MEC/UXO clearance work. This work is extremely costly and time consuming and its unreasonable for the contractor to not be able to get the NAS approved until this work is complete. Please add MEC/UXO as a condition of NAS approval.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

91. Specification section 01 32 17.00 20 para 1.10.1.10.1 Cost loaded Activities states: “Costs for mobilization, will not be paid as individual pay items with the expectation of batch plant…” The contractor will need to mobilize way ahead of construction due to the MECC/UXO scope of work and should not be made to wait for payment of mobilizing and set up of the project until MEC is complete. Please confirm the contractor will be allowed to bill for mobilization upon completion of mobilization to the project site.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

92. Specification section 01 35 13 para 3.1.2. Please confirm that the project does not fall under CAAP requirements and does not require notifications.

ANSWER: CAAP requirements do apply to the project and notifications are required.

93. P9001_Specifications, Section 01 57 19 03, Page 10, Paragraph 3.4 Work Schedule for Intrusive Activities states: “Review the proposed work schedule and identify site specific issues and working hours of the EZ at the Post Award Kickoff Meeting.

The contractor shall schedule work appropriately to mitigate, to the greatest extent practicable, the impacts to base operations and the general public. Scheduling shall include phasing as well as night and weekend work as necessary.

The contractor’s Exclusion Zone Work Schedule shall be described in the ESS Work Plan. The contractor shall submit requests for Additional Exclusion Zone work schedule at least 5-business days in advance.”

In order for contractors to develop an approach for the MEC intrusive phase of work, it is requested that the Government provide details related to the base operations and activities of the general public that are impacted by the EZ and would need to be mitigated through the work schedule.

a. What is the type, duration, and frequency of base operations and public activities/events that would result in the need for weekend or night work?

ANSWER: PAF cannot divulge the specifics of the base operations due to security reasons. Awardee will coordinate with PAF security to de-conflict any construction activities.

Construction schedule will not be significantly affected during public events/activities since the construction site is distant from most of the venues for public events.

b. What is the type, duration, and frequency of base operations and public activities/events that cannot be impacted by the EZ and would result in the suspension of MEC intrusive activities?

94. P9001_Specifications, Section 01 57 19 03, Page 3, Paragraph 1.2/1.2.1 Schedule Requirements Prior to the Start of Work. “Before preparation of the Project Baseline Schedule, and prior to the start of work, meet with the Contracting Officer to discuss the proposed schedule and the requirements of this section.”

Considering there is the RFP/MRESS requirement to complete the MEC/MPPEH clearance prior to the starting the construction work, it is requested that the Government confirms that construction activities can commence in areas of the site where MEC/MPPEH clearance is complete, has passed QC inspections, and been accepted by the 3rd Party QA. In accordance with the MRESS, acceptance by the 3rd Party QA will signify that MEC/MPPEH clearance is complete within grids, designated lots, and/or the overall project site, and not through final government approval of the After Action Report or MRESS Closeout Report.

ANSWER: MEC must be done before construction. MRESS requirements will be provided in a forthcoming amendment.

95. Given the turnaround time of pricing received from subcontractors, we respectfully request the Government allow electronic submission of proposals rather than requiring submission of paper copies and CDs.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

96. DWG GI 101 shows the site access/haul route via Outpost 25. NAVFAC currently has a local contractor performing design build construction of the new perimeter PCC road in this very area where the contractor for the parking apron is to use. Does the Government have an alternate route for site access as this area will likely be under construction when this contract is awarded?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

97. DWG GI 101 shows the location for the contractor’s laydown area. The laydown area shows the new road running straight through the middle of the area. For this project, the contractor will need a very large, unobstructed area to construct the site offices, testing labs, curing rooms, on-site batch plant, cement silos, aggregate storage area, and loading bins. The new road will be blocked for the duration of the project. Please confirm that the contractor will not be forced to relocate the laydown yard to accommodate use of the new road. Alternatively, please identify another location large enough to account for the requirements of this project.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

98. DWG GI 101 shows the location for the contractor’s laydown area and stockpile areas.

These do not appear to be within the boundaries for MEC clearance. As excavation and clearing work will need to be performed in these areas to accommodate the laydown area, office, utilities, etc., can you please confirm that MEC clearance will need to be extended out to this area?

ANSWER: Yes, MEC clearance will be required for all earth moving operations. See Spec 01 57 19 section 3.10.

99. DWG GC 101 shows the project phasing. Please confirm that this phasing does not need to be followed for MEC clearance and the entire area can be worked on as a single area, removing the requirement to phase MEC clearance? A phased MEC clearance in accordance with this DWG would significantly increase cost and schedule.

ANSWER: Work along Taxiway E will require phasing as the taxiway needs to be shut down while work is being done.

106. DWG CS 301 detail A1 shows the tie in detail between apron and existing taxiway. It shows a 500mm mill and overlay of the existing taxiway. The existing taxiway in the location of the project is in extremely poor condition. It is failing and the surface is of extremely poor condition. It will be impossible to get a joint compaction and finish in this area that meets the spec due to the condition of the existing pavement. Please confirm that the Government accepts the joint quality will not be achieved in this location due to poor existing conditions.

ANSWER: Taxiway E will be repaved prior to construction.

107. DWG CG 100 shows the new overall grading and drainage plan. After performing a quantity estimate of the cut and fill, the volume of fill material required for the project is extremely large and will require a huge import effort, which will directly impact cost. Is there a borrow pit on site that can be utilized for fill material to reduce the cost of imported fill?

ANSWER: Drawings will show borrow pit locations in a forthcoming amendment. The approximate volume available is 500 cubic meters.

109. DWG CU 100 shows the locations of the new fire hydrants. These hydrants are approx. 5 meters away from the closest hard surface adjacent to the parking apron. Basa experiences a heavy amount of rainfall. Without proper access to the hydrants, the access is likely to become muddy and swamped and cause a safety issue for the end user. Would the Government consider installing an aggregate hard standing access way between the pavement and the hydrants to avoid safety issues in the wet and rainy season?

ANSWER: The space between the shoulder and hydrants will be paved to avoid safety issues in the wet season. Asphalt will be used instead of aggregate surfacing to minimize FOD risk.

112. DWG EA 603 keynote 4 states: “Update existing ALCMS with new taxiway apron lighting. Provide new power supply for control panel and any additional troubleshooting required to ensure ALCMS is operational at project completion.” Please advise if the Government is aware of any issue with the current ALCMS system that would warrant troubleshooting. Also, please confirm that the existing ALMCS system will be tested and certified by a 3rd party as being in good working order and complete prior to hand-over to the contractor to commence demolition work.

ANSWER: ALCMS is currently not operational and therefore will not be certified as operational prior to hand-over.

114. DWG S-102 detail A3 shows the design details of the ground slab and ring beam to support the new storage tank. Note 6 states: “Design, furnish and install tank, foundation and associated platforms, railings and anchorage.” Is the contractor to perform a design for the foundation if the design has already been completed by the Government, or is the contractor to simply verify the Government design is sufficient? If the Government design does not meet the requirements of the spied tank, will the contractor receive a modification from the Government for any additional costs to increase the foundations sizes?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

NOTICE NO. 2

115. Section 00 21 16, Paragraphs 1.1.a and 1.1.b: We request the Government reconsider its request for hard copy proposals and instead allow for electronic proposals to be submitted via the DoD SAFE, PIEE, or via email. This has been the common practice for proposals submitted to the DoD since the onset of COVID in March of 2020.

ANSWER: The Government has considered your request, however, the RFP remains unchanged.

116. Section 00 21 16, Paragraphs 1.1.a and 1.1.b: If hardcopies are ultimately required, would the Government please consider allowing for a DoD SAFE, PIEE, or email submission on the due date and time followed by hardcopies 5 business days later?

ANSWER: The Government has considered your request, however, the RFP remains unchanged.

117. Section 00 21 16, Paragraph 1.1.c: Will the Government reconsider its request for an electronic copy of the proposal on CD-ROM? Or allow bidders to provide a CD-ROM within 5 business days following the bid due date? This will allow bidders to work pricing right up to the due date and time, without having to cut off bid preparations early just to burn a CD-ROM. This will result in the most up to date and competitive pricing for the Navy.

ANSWER: The Government has considered your request, however, the RFP remains unchanged.

118. Section 00 22 00, Factor 3 Safety (a): Please confirm that OSHA logs are required only for a Prime Offer member that is a US based company.

ANSWER: In accordance with Document 00 22 00 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, Paragraph 2.3, Factor 3 – SAFETY(a) “The Offeror shall submit the following information: For a partnership, joint venture, or LLC etc., separate TRC, DART, OSHA 300 logs and OSHA Form 300A submittal requirements are required for each partner/member.” Confirmed, OSHA 300 and 300A logs are not required for non-US companies.

119. Section 00 21 16, Paragraphs 1.1.a and 1.1.b: We request that the due date for proposals be established at receipt of all RFI responses plus 21 days so that we have time to evaluate the responses and coordinate with our Team.

ANSWER: The Government has considered your request, however, the RFP remains unchanged.

120. Section 00 21 16, Complementary Pricing Information: Please further clarify the price detail breakout the Government is requesting on this form.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

121. If hardcopies are ultimately required, Section 00 21 16, FAR 52.236-28 indicates proposals must be manually signed. We noted that the SF1442 is to be manually signed (wet signature), and also bonds. Please clarify if there are any other documents that require manual (wet) signatures.

ANSWER: Contractors shall submit proposals in accordance with Document 00 21 16, INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS. Please refer to sub-paragraph 1.1 NUMBERS OF COPIES/TIME OF RECEIPT (a)(1) which states, “Manually (wet signature) signed and completed SF1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award)” and sub-paragraph 1.5 PREAWARD SURVEY/RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION (a) which states, “If bonds are not signed manually (wet signature), documents of appointment must include specific authorization and corporate approval for the use of electronic and facsimile signatures by the appointed individual(s).”

122. Construction material costs have increased significantly in recent times, and the construction material market continues to be volatile and unpredictable. It is anticipated that construction material costs will continue to increase into the foreseeable future; however, it is not possible to predict how much prices will increase by the time the project is awarded and construction commences. To protect both the Government and the Contractor, would the Government consider incorporating FAR 52.216-4 Economic Price Adjustment-Labor and Material or a substantially similar and suitable price adjustment clause in the RFP and resulting contract to allow for an adjustment to the FFP in the event of significant and unpredictable material costs fluctuation during the term of the project? Inclusion of this clause will protect and benefit the Government because the offered prices will not need to account for the elevated risk of unknown future material cost escalations.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

123. Due to tighter cybersecurity controls enforced by CMMC 2.0, specifically Sections 3.8.6,

3.8.7 and 3.8.8 of NIST 800 171 revision 2, the use of external USB storage devices, CD burners, external drives, etc. is prohibited on laptop and desktop computers effective 3 October 2022. To remain compliant with these cybersecurity control measures, please consider electronic submission of proposals via DoD SAFE vs. hard copy with a CD ROM.

ANSWER: Proposal documents do not contain CUI markings or distribution limitations.

Contractors shall submit proposals in accordance with Document 00 21 16, INSTRUCTIONS

TO PROPOSERS.

124. Specification Section 01 14 00, paragraph 1.3.1.3 requires a PCAB license and several permits and clearances. This paragraph appears to add requirements not in Article VIII of the DEFENSE Cooperation Agreement Between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the PHILIPPINES, which states, “United States forces may contract for any materiel, supplies, equipment, and services (including construction) to be furnished or undertaken in the territory of the Philippines without restriction as to choice of contractor, supplier, or person who provides such materiel, supplies, equipment, or services.” Please clarify which document takes precedence for this contract.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

125. If a PCAB license and the other items in Section 01 14 00, paragraph 1.3.1.3 are required, please confirm that it is acceptable for one of the JV Members that will serve as the primary construction execution entity for this project to hold the PCAB license/permits/clearances.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

126. If a PCAB license and the other items in Section 01 14 00, paragraph 1.3.1.3 are required, please confirm that it is acceptable for a JV Member that has the Factor 1 Experience and Factor 2 Past Performance to secure via a Teaming Agreement a company affiliate that will serve as the primary construction execution entity for this project to hold the PCAB license/permits/clearances.

127. 24R1304_RFP, Factor 1 – Experience, Note 5. In the Factor 1 Experience, please confirm if the experience of a teammate who signed a teaming agreement with the offeror is enough to satisfy the relevancy requirement of Factor 1 Experience, provided that the agreement is consistent with the scope listed in the teaming agreement.

ANSWER: A relevant project as defined in Document 00 22 00, EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, is “New construction of an airfield (aircraft taxiway, runway, or apron) Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement of at least 20,000 square meters with a minimum concrete thickness of 300 mm. Completed or substantially completed within fifteen (15) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Substantially complete means at least 90% physically complete.”

Further, please refer to Factor 1 – Experience, Note 5, which states “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 in a role that is consistent with that entity’s role in the project submitted.”

128. 24R1304_RFP, Section 1.1 Instructions to Proposers. Can the Government consider an electronic proposal to eliminate delivery duration and allow KTR more time to prepare technical and price proposals.

ANSWER: The Government has considered your request, however, the RFP remains unchanged.

129. Section 32 13 14.13. para 1.4.3. KTR is requesting the Government to provide a list of approved laboratories in the Philippines

ANSWER: Response deferred.

130. DWG. No. 17307798 Sheet No. FX402 and Spec. Section 33 16 15 page 7. Fire Protection.

There is a conflict with the dimensions of Water Tank between Equipment Schedule on plan and Specifications, please confirm which will prevail.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

131. Fire Protection.For Water Tank, please confirm if we could offer different tank dimension but with same capacity since our local supplier cannot meet the specified dimension requirement.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

132. P9001_Specifications. KTR is requesting the Government to provide Specifications Section 34 for Aircraft Tie Down and Mooring. These equipment is shown in the site plan but not included in the specification.

End of Notice