24R1308 Note 2.pdf

Notice No. 2

28 March 2024

PRE-PROPOSAL QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

RFP N62742-24-R-1308

FY23 MCON P-923 AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON, FY25 MCON P-941 MAINTENANCE

SUPPORT FACILITY, AND FY25 MCON P-949 AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR,

ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE BASE, DARWIN, AUSTRALIA

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 14 MARCH 2024

2. Design Model - Will NAVFAC provide the design 12d native models from the designers to allow accurate volume checks of earthworks and pavements?

ANSWER: NAVFAC will provide to successful Contractor.

17. We refer to the three projects that are the subject of the above RFP and the nominated closing date being 18th April 2024. We respectfully request this be significantly extended to allow our team to compile a comprehensive offer that ultimately provides Government with the best value offer along with an increased degree of confidence that the scope is fully understood and captured in the bid. We do not believe at this time that we can achieve the above in the time allocated due to the following reasons:

• Many of the drawings have incomplete or inconsistent details and we are compiling a comprehensive set of RFI’s to address these over the next week.

• The scope across the three projects is complex and multidisciplinary and no Bill of Quantities or 3D models have been provided. This necessitates a full quantity take-off for the whole of the scope before we can productively engage the supply chain.

• Key subcontractors and suppliers across the Northern Territory of Australia have indicated they will be unlikely to provide input pricing in the time available. This is exacerbated by the non-working days captured in the period for the Easter and Anzac Day long weekends.

• The specifications are not business as usual for Australian industry and it will take time to get the Australian supply chain to understand and give compliant offers.

• While we understand the time imperative for the project, additional time would allow more detailed assessment of all project elements negating the need for adding significant risk/contingency amounts to the pricing.

A four week extension to the closing date from 18th April 2024 to 16th May is requested and we trust you understand our reasoning and give our request due consideration.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND, PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DRIVE, SUITE 100

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR HICKAM, HAWAII 96860-3134

ANSWER: The proposal due date will be extended three (3) weeks to May 9, 2024. Amendment forthcoming.

NOTICE NO. 2

18. Specifications P941, P923, P949, SECTION 31 23 00 00 20 Excavation and Fill. Clause

3.10.7.2 contains no proof roll pass / fail criteria. Please confirm what the pass/fail criteria will be?

ANSWER: Section 31 23 00 00.20 'Excavation and Fill' will be revised to provide clarification in a forthcoming amendment.

19. Specifications P941, P923, P949, SECTION 32 11 20 Subbase and Select Material - Table 3 Weak Particles requirement for crushed rock subbase material is 100%. Please advise if in error?

ANSWER: Section 32 11 20, Table 3: the maximum limit for weak particles for 'crushed rock subbase material' (tested in accordance with AS 1141.32) is 1.0% (not 100%). Amendment is forthcoming.

20. Specifications P941, P923, P949, SECTION 32 11 20 Subbase and Select Material - Clause 3.11.2.2. Request clarification that the Select Fill does NOT have a post compaction requirement like subbase and base course crush rock. Suggest amendment to wording to reflect that this clause does not require post compaction testing on Select Fill?

ANSWER: Clause 3.11.2.2 'Particle Size Distribution' specifically applied to post-compaction testing of Crushed Rock Subbase Material. There is no requirement for assessment of the Particle Size Distribution and Linear Shrinkage of Select Fill material within each placed layer post-compaction.

21. Specifications P941, P923, P949, SECTION 32 11 20 Subbase and Select Material - Clause 3.11.2.2. notes that post compaction requirements are required however exclude reference to table 4 in addition to table 3. Please confirm post compaction testing requirements shall be assessed against both table 3 and 4?

ANSWER: With reference to Section 32 11 20, clause 11.2.2, the conformance of the Particle Size Distribution of Crushed Rock Subbase Material post compaction must be assessed against the grading envelope for 'Crushed Rock Subbase Material' in Table 4. The conformance of the Linear Shrinkage must be assessed against the maximum Linear Shrinkage for 'Crushed Rock Subbase Material' in accordance with the requirement in Table 3. Amendment is forthcoming.

22. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 11 33.13 Portland Cement Stabilized Base - Table 2 - Percent passing is the same for both 2.36mm and 425um sieves. Please confirm if the 425um is in error and if so, confirm required percent passing for both 2.36mm and 425um sieves?

ANSWER: Specification Section 32 11 36.13 'Lean Concrete Base Course' Table 3 'Aggregate Gradation - Lean Concrete Base Course' provides gradations A, B and C; there is no grading requirement for the 2.36 mm sieve.

23. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) - Clause

2.2.2 Blended cements - requires Fly Ash to be interground with cement clinker. Please approve

Supplemental Cementitious Materials (SCMs) to be stored in batch silos and blended at the concrete plant? This is due to the High Temp and Lean concretes will have differing SCM ratios.

ANSWER: Where 'blended cement' is manufactured at the concrete plant, it does not conform to the requirements of AS 3972 'Portland and blended cements' as specified in Section 32 13 13.43 and Section 32 11 36.13. It is acknowledged however that manufacturing 'blended cement' through mixing cement clinker with Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCM's) at the concrete plant may achieve the same concrete performance as if a blended cement with the same AS 3972 proportions was used.

Storing and blending of cement at the plant as a departure from the specified approach shall comply with AS 3972, the Contractor will need to submit a detailed Quality Assurance methodology statement demonstrating how the blending process and mix proportions will be managed at the plant to achieve the blend ratios specified in Section 32 13 13.43 for High Temperature Concrete (AS 3972 Type GB) and Section 32 11 36.13 for Lean mix concrete (AS 3972 Type GP, GL or GB) in accordance with AS 3972 Section 4 'Cement Types and Composition' including Table 1 which defines the composition of the cement type and the percentage by mass of mineral additions and Supplementary Cementitious Materials. The compliance statement must fully detail how the blend proportions will be managed for the full duration of production inclusive of any proposed testing to ensure there are no fluctuations which may adversely impact the concrete flexural strength or other specified properties for the duration of concrete production. As specified in clause 2.2.2, a written statement must be provided that the amount of pozzolan in the finished cement does not vary more than plus or minus 5 mass percent of the finished cement for lot to lot or within a lot.

24. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) Clause

2.2.4 SCM - allows only Fly Ash. Northern Territory is not serviced with bulk fly ash. Please confirm the use of GGBFS (Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag) is permitted if HB 79 (ASR) is required.

ANSWER: Specification 32 13 13.43 clause 2.2.4 'Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCM) Content' requires use of Special Grade Fly Ash which conforms to AS 3581.1 special grade.

Use of Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag conforming to AS 3582.2 may be considered for approval by the Government as an alternative Supplementary Cementitious Material (SCM) providing the Contractor can demonstrate the concrete mix achieves the specified requirements including flexural strength, workability and durability.

25. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) Clause

2.3.1.3 please correct test method from AS 1141.60 to AS 1141.60.1. to avoid any confusion?

ANSWER: Section 32 13 13.43 clause 2.3.1.3 'Alkali-Silica Reactivity for Traprock' specifies test method AS 1141.60.1 'Methods for sampling and testing aggregates, Method 60.1: Potential alkali-silica reactivity - Accelerated mortar method method'. Amendment forthcoming.

26. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock). Clause

2.3.3.1 allows natural sand to be used. Clause 2.3.3.4 are additional ‘fine’ aggregate requirements for crushed fine aggregate. Please confirm if these requirements are to be used for Natural Sand or provide the criteria to be used for natural sands?

ANSWER: In Section 32 13 13.43, Clause 2.3.3.4 'Additional Fine Aggregate Requirements' Table 7, the 'Aggregate soundness - evaluation by exposure to sodium sulphate solution' (AS 1141.26) must not be more than 6% and the 'Secondary minerals content in basic igneous rocks' (AS 1141.24) must be not more than 20%.

The conformance criteria specified for 'fine aggregates' in Table 7 apply to both manufactured sand and natural sand material however the following conformance tests are not required for natural sand: 'Deleterious fines index (DFI)', 'Secondary minerals content'.

Amendment is forthcoming.

27. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) - Clause

2.4.1 limits admixtures to AEA and WR types. Clause 2.4.1 then allows retarding admixtures.

For the warmer temperatures of Darwin, please confirm that RE (retarding) Type admixtures are allowable to control set times and enable finishing and saw cutting operations in an appropriate time frame? Clause 2.12.1 Please confirm if allowing accelerator admixture is an error?

ANSWER: Section 32 13 13.43 clause 2.4.1 is correct, only Air-entraining agent and Water reducing admixture types are currently permitted. Section 32 13 13.43 will be revised to provide clarification. Use of an accelerator admixture is not permitted. Amendment is forthcoming.

28. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) - Clause

2.10.2 allows horizontal shaft mixers. Please confirm that Twin Shaft mixers are permitted (dual horizontal shafts)?

ANSWER: The use of a twin shaft (horizontal) stationary mixer is permitted provided it meets the requirements of the specification for 'Stationary mixers' in clause 2.10.2.1 and 2.10.2.2.

29. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) - Clause

2.10.2.1 restricts stationary mixers to drum mixers. Can the specification be expanded/amended to include Twin Shaft mixers?

ANSWER: Refer to response to Question 28.

30. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) - Clause

2.10.5 limits trafficking strength to 28 days. Clause 2.11.1 specifies a 90-day strength of 5.0 MPa. Clause 2.11.6 specifies concrete strength conformance at 28 days. Clause 2.12.2.4(h) requires the Trial Mixture Study to develop a 14 to 90-day flexural strength ratio. Should this be 28 days to 90 days to align with the clause 2.11.6?

ANSWER: Clause 2.11.1 is correct, the concrete flexural strength must be a minimum of 5.0 MPa at 90 days. Clause 2.12.2.4 (h) is correct, the Trial Mixture Study must develop a 14 to 90-day flexural strength ratio. Clause 2.10.5 specifically relates to trafficking of the newly placed concrete by concrete haul trucks.

Clarification will be provided in a forthcoming amendment.

31. Specifications P923, SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temp Concrete (Traprock) & SECTION 32 13 14.13 Concrete Paving for Airfields - Please confirm which specification is to be used with each concrete pavement?

ANSWER: The rigid pavement areas where High Temperature Resistant Concrete (in accordance with specification 32 13 13.43) and Portland Cement Concrete (in accordance with specification 32 13 13.13) are required to be placed are shown on drawings CP110 to CP118 and the pavement profile drawings CP501 and CP502. For the avoidance of doubt, the rigid pavement areas requiring placement of High Temperature Resistant Concrete in accordance with specification 32 13 13.43 are the helipads, selected areas on the P923 apron (designated on CP110 to CP118) and the aircraft rinse.

32. General: Can the client confirm if a Bill of Quantities will be issued to the tenderers? If so, please issue?

ANSWER: Bill of Quantities will not be provided.

33. General: Can the client confirm if the electronic design files will be issued?

ANSWER: Electronic design files will not be provided.

34. General: Can the client confirm if the existing RAAF Base Darwin existing services model electronic file be issued? We understand that there is significant project works (by others) occurring in the vicinity of the Project scope of works. This will allow the tenderers to assess the impacts of existing services?

ANSWER: RAAF Base Darwin electronic files will not be provided.

35. P-941 Signed Final Design Drawings Part 3 No details and/or schedules are provided for the compressed air system within the Armory Building. Please provide details.

ANSWER: Armory air compressor to be 659 l/min free air delivery at 100 psi, 190 liter integral receiver, 240v with min 2 air pumps. Amendment is forthcoming.

36. P-941 Signed Final Design Drawings Part 3 - Armory Building FCU-B-01 is nominated within the schedule to have 330L/s outside air, but the drawings do not indicate any outside air ductwork to this unit? Please advise requirement.

ANSWER: Tap off the 300x300 pre-cooled duct prior to transitioning to the pc 200x200 duct.

branch to be 400x200 with manual volume damper. Amendment is forthcoming.

37. P-941 Signed Final Design Drawings Part 3 - Please confirm if there are any reheat requirements for the VAV units. The drawings and schedules lead them towards requiring reheat however no actual heat capacities, etc. are provided.

If required, please provide capacities required for pricing purposes?

ANSWER: No reheat required for vav boxes.

38. P941/949 Signed Final Design Drawings Part 3 - As per the below detail (from the mechanical package), it details ‘punched key hole to operate lockwood 35791 chrome plated deadlock’. As it only mentions a ‘punched key hole’ do we assume that the actual lock will be supplied and installed by others?

ANSWER: Lock shall be provided by contractor with keys turned over to the users.

39. P941/949 Signed Final Design Drawings Part 3 - The majority of air conditioning ductwork within these projects is detailed with external insulation. This is not best practice and suitable for the tropical Darwin conditions. Please confirm external insulation is required or advise otherwise?

ANSWER: We acknowledge typical insulation in Darwin is not external insulation, this is a client requirement (Based on UFC 3-410-01 - 4-2.6.9: "Duct insulation must be external, and duct board or internal duct liner is not allowed.").

40. P941 Signed Final Design Drawings Part 3 - Armory Building, please provide additional information for extraction unit (EF-B-02) to enable to source supplier pricing. Further, we require details for the required extraction/exhaust arms?

ANSWER: Provide per schedule M-601 and spec 23 35 19.00 20. Extraction arms to be 50mm diameter, aluminum tubes, pp plastic joints, rated at flowrate shown on drawings. Amendment is forthcoming.

41. Specifications, Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule (T-Sheets) P941/949 - In reference to wall Cladding CD01, please confirm whether Trimdek or Trapezoid profile is required?

ANSWER: In accordance with the UFC requirements product and manufactures names have not been nominated in the documentation. The Tenderers are referred to the performance requirements provide for wall cladding CD01.

42. Specifications, Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule (T-Sheets) P941/949 - Please confirm pattern description and spacing requirements of the tamper-evident screws to the roof & walls?

ANSWER: The drawings nominate the requirements for installing tamper evident roof and wall fixings. The Tee sheet notes which products or linings have them.

Example dwg A-001 nominates required compliance refer notes 3, 7 and 8. The expectation would be the first top and bottom rows of fixings would be the tamper resistant type. I.e. not every fixing is tamper resistant.

43. General: P941 - Please confirm whether there is a requirement for a roof safety system to the Armory building as it is not currently documented?

ANSWER: There is not requirement for a roof safety system.

44. General: P941/949 - Please provide sanitaryware and tapware schedule.

ANSWER: Refer to Architectural drawings such as AB411 (Armoury), AA411 (MSF) (Hangar) and to T-Sheet.

INTs dwgs make reference to FF&E schedules.

HYD dwg sets make reference to plumbing items.

45. General: - P941/949 - Please advise if a level 4 finish and 2 coats of paint are required to all partition walls above ceiling height?

ANSWER: The Tee sheets PA codes call up a 3 coat paint system on walls (primer/sealer and 2 top coats).

46. General: - P941/949 - Schedules for both projects do not nominate manufacturers, only criteria. Can manufacturers please be nominated?

ANSWER: In accordance with the UFC requirements product and manufactures names have not been nominated in the documentation.

47. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - G.13 the drawing states -

DURING CONSTRUCTION, ENSURE THERE IS NO CONFLICT WITH P0009, P700, P600,

P941, P949 and DARWIN MTR PROJECTS. In order for the tenderer to assess and 'de-conflict' with these concurrent projects. We understand that the Darwin MTR Project involves the construction of a new Heavy Vehicle access for Bombing Road and based on the publicly available Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works relating to RAAF DARWIN Mid Term Refresh Project that these works are expected to commence in mid 2024 and completion in 2027. Can the client confirm scope of works, program and impacts to access associated with the Darwin MTR Project to Bombing Road Heavy Construction Access point 1 noted on NAVFAC drawing 17308926?

ANSWER: There are no scope conflicts between any of the projects, however the contractor is required to deconfliction the timing of their works within the same vicinity of the other project.

48. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - G.13 the drawing states -

DURING CONSTRUCTION, ENSURE THERE IS NO CONFLICT WITH P0009, P700, P600,

P941, P949 and DARWIN MTR PROJECTS. In order for the tenderer to assess and 'de-conflict' with these concurrent projects. We understand that the Darwin MTR Project involves the upgrade of Potable Water Network, Fire Water Network and Sewerage System and based on the publicly available Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works relating to RAAF DARWIN Mid Term Refresh Project that these works are expected to commence in mid 2024 and completion in 2027. Can the client confirm scope of works, detailed program and any impacts to the contract works associated with the Darwin MTR Project to Potable Water Network, Fire Water Network and Sewerage System?

ANSWER: There are no scope conflicts between any of the projects, however the contractor is required to deconfliction the timing of their works within the same vicinity of the other project.

49. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - G.13 the drawing states -

DURING CONSTRUCTION, ENSURE THERE IS NO CONFLICT WITH P0009, P700, P600,

P941, P949 and DARWIN MTR PROJECTS. In order for the tenderer to assess and 'de-conflict' with these concurrent projects. Can the client confirm the scope, program and what impacts the P0009 Project will have on the Project scope of works? We understand P0009 project has created additional laydown areas and occupying the project works footprint.

ANSWER: There are no scope conflicts between any of the projects, however the contractor is required to deconfliction the timing of their works within the same vicinity of the other project.

50. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - G.13 the drawing states -

DURING CONSTRUCTION, ENSURE THERE IS NO CONFLICT WITH P0009, P700, P600,

P941, P949 and DARWIN MTR PROJECTS. In order for the tenderer to assess and 'de-conflict' with these concurrent projects. Can the client confirm the scope, program and what impacts the P600 Project will have on the Project scope of works?

ANSWER: There are no scope conflicts between any of the projects, however the contractor is required to deconfliction the timing of their works within the same vicinity of the other project.

51. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - G.13 the drawing states -

DURING CONSTRUCTION, ENSURE THERE IS NO CONFLICT WITH P0009, P700, P600,

P941, P949 and DARWIN MTR PROJECTS. In order for the tenderer to assess and 'de-conflict' with these concurrent projects. Can the client confirm the scope, program and what impacts the P700 Project will have on the Project scope of works?

ANSWER: There are no scope conflicts between any of the projects, however the contractor is required to deconfliction the timing of their works within the same vicinity of the other project.

52. NAVFAC Drawing 17308926 - We note that there is a Liquid Dry Breathing Oxygen Facility located within the close vicinity of the Project scope of works. Can the client confirm if there is any restriction and clearance zones required for the LDBO facility during storage and when unloading/loading LDBO?

ANSWER: No additional exclusion zone is expected beyond the existing fenced area for the LDBO facility.

53. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - SV.4. CADASTRAL

INFORMATION IN SURVEY IS APPROXIMATE ONLY AND IS SUBJECT TO

DEFINITION BY A CADASTRAL SURVEY. - Does the Tenderer need to undertake Cadastral Survey works or will be completed by the Client? Please confirm scope of works, if any?

ANSWER: The Government will not be appointing a surveyor for the works. The Contractor is responsible for all survey works for the project.

54. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - SV.7. CONTRACTOR TO

LIAISE WITH APPOINTED SURVEYOR REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING

SURVEY MARKS. - Please confirm the appointed surveyor and contact details?

ANSWER: The Government will not be appointing a surveyor for the works. The Contractor is responsible for all survey works for the project.

55. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - ST.5. THE CONTRACTOR IS

RESPONSIBLE FOR DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT OF STOCKPILE LOCATIONS

WITHIN THE AREAS DEFINED ON THIS DRAWING. - Please confirm the available areas and relevant drawing noting the note ST.5 drawing does not contain any areas or plan view of the project?

ANSWER: Stockpile areas are to be located within the footprint of the project works. The contractor will be required to locate the stockpiles to suit their construction program. Refer drawing CV001 for Limit of Disturbance.

56. NAVFAC Drawing 17308954 (General notes C-002) - CF.1. MAKE ALLOWANCE

FOR ASSESSMENT OF UTILITY CAPACITY, CONNECTION TO EXISTING UTILITIES,

METERING AND ONGOING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH UTILITY USAGE AT

MARKET RATES FOR THE DURATION OF THIS PROJECT. SEEK DETAILS AND

APPROVAL OF THE SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN RAAF BASE DARWN

STAKEHOLDERS. - Please provide details of the suitable connection points for potable water, sewer and Electricity available near the worksite? Please confirm the capacity of each that the

Tenderer can rely upon to deliver the works? Please confirm market rates to be adopted for the supply of Water, Electricity and sewer?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

57. RFP Document 00 22 00, Section 2.2 (a) (1): Offerors can utilize projects completed within the last fifteen (15) years from the date of issuance of the solicitation to demonstrate construction experience. To meet the dollar threshold for some of these older projects, would the Government allow Offerors to utilize an online calculator to determine the cumulative inflation rate (CPI inflation) over the course of time between award date and 2024 to establish equivalent buying power? For example, a project awarded for $25M in 2015 would be equivalent to $32.7M in 2024, a cumulative price increase of 30.93%.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

58. [Contractor] formally requests an extension of time for the submission of the “Request for Proposal” for the P923, 941 & 949 projects. The additional duration requested is 6 weeks. If granted this would result in a new submisison date of 30th May 2024. To enable [Contractor] to deliver the Tender to this extended item period, we require the approval of the EOT by 12 March 2024.

The substantiation for this request has been included below;

Easter Holidays Within Australia the Easter Holiday is celebrated from the 29th March (Good

Friday) to the 1st April (Public Holiday) This results in a loss of 2 work days.

Industry shutdown

Following on from the Easter holiday, the Australian construction industry has a number of industry shutdown days. These days are from Tuesday the 2nd April to Friday the 5th April.

As a result of Easter and the industry shutdown period, 6 work days are lost.

Resulting in it being very difficult to communicate with the industry or receive information / pricing from industry.

Limited Subcontractor pool, requiring interest to be sort from other Australian states.

The Construction industry within the Northern Territory is currently very stimulated and it is difficult to get commitment or interest from the Subcontract market during a tender period.

Construction activity in the Northern Territory has exhausted the ability of the Local Subcontractor market, so it will be necessary to engage with Subcontractors from other States, namely Queensland and Western Australia.

The best way to manage this situation is to allow a generous amount of time to engage with the industry to allow them time to consider the project, develop resourcing and material supplies strategies.

Deep engagement with the Subcontractors will assist with Industry providing accurate, complete pricing that reflects the requirements contained within the tender documentation.

Current Labor shortages in the Northern Territory, which is affecting Subcontractor interest in projects.

Further to the limited Subcontractor pool identified above, the availability of a competent workforce to deliver projects in the Norther Territory is also challenging.

The Subcontractors will need time to develop a sound resourcing strategy to ensure availability of a competent workforce.

Australian Defence workload currently being delivered.

The Australian Defence force has numerous projects being delivered or soon to be released for tender in the Northern Territory.

[Contractor] will need time to engage with the Subcontractors to encourage them to pivot away from delivering Australian Defence projects and focus on delivering NAVFAC projects.

Average tender period for Defence is 8 weeks.

Within the Australian Construction Industry, it is normal for tender durations to be 8 weeks.

With the more complex and larger tenders providing additional duration is provided.

The timeframe currently identified for this very complex tender is 6 weeks. With the Easter holiday in the middle, this reduces to approximately 4.5 weeks to compile the tender response.

Bill of Quantity Compilation.

In order to assist the Subcontractors and ensure that pricing is provided for all aspects of the tender, a Bill of Quantities (BOQ) will be produced for the project.

Current advice from various Quantity Surveyors in the market, is indicating that it will take 4 weeks to develop the BOQ, resulting in approximately 9th April 24.

This duration will not work with the current tender period as we would not have time post completion of the BOQ to engage with the Subcontractors to ensure all aspects of the tender have been suitably costed.

This situation will result in excessive amounts of risk provision being included in the tender estimate to cover the “Gap” risk.

Last RFI date Clause 1.3 of the RFT document indicates that the last opportunity to submit questions regarding the solicitation is to be no less that 10 days before the proposal receipt date. This equates to the 8th April.

At this stage we are not going to receive the BOQ until 9th April 24. At this time we will issue to Subcontractors and it will invariably result in numerous questions needing to be raised.

Temporary Engineering Design o [Contractor] require appropriate time to research, engage professional advice, undertake design for the temporary works/ build methodology requirements, workshop construction methodology with the local market, estimating, and undertaker [Contractor’s] internal QA processes.

[Contractor] understands the time pressures that NAVFAC have of the tender, although the additional time would allow us to submit a complete tender that is considered and address all risk.

ANSWER: The proposal due date will be extended three (3) weeks to May 9, 2024. Amendment forthcoming.

59. Document 00 22 00 page 3 of 7, para 1.b. Currently under the type of building construction, relevant projects shall have been completed withing the last fifteen (15) years from the date of issuance of the solicitation. New construction of aircraft hangar buildings/structures with long spans have not been in abundance over the last 15-20 years, thereby limiting small firms experience as members of a team.

Will the government please consider expanding the recency criterion for this requirement to “within the last 20 years”?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

60. Document 00 21 16 page 2 of 17, paragraph 1.1.c and 1.1d.2 – Hand carried delivery of proposals. Currently the government is requiring hard copy proposal with wet ink signatures and electronic CD copies for the electronic version.

Due to the logistical and potential timing considerations inherent to delivering parcels to Hawaii, will the Government please consider allowing electronic-only proposal submission according to one (1) or both of the following two (2) standard NAVFAC procedures?

1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

Proposals (with all required supporting documentation) shall be submitted by electronic mail (e-mail).

Hard copy proposals will not be accepted.

Proposals shall be emailed to the following address:

Contract Specialist, Ms. Kylee K. Chun Kylee.k.chun.civ@us.navy.mil

Subject line of email should be labeled: RFP SOLICITATION NO. N62742-22-R-

1308_COMPANY NAME

No email sent shall be larger than ___MB in size. If the proposing company must send multiple emails, then each email must be labeled with the subject as “Email x of n”, where x is the unique number and n is the total number of emails. The time stamp of when the email is received by the Contracting Officer shall be official, so please provide enough time when sending to allow for possible server delays.

PROPOSAL FORMAT

Offeror’s proposal must be submitted in accordance with the following instructions.

Nonconformance may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. Non-Cost/Price Proposal and Price Proposal shall be separate attached files and shall be labeled accordingly. All files shall be Adobe PDF formatted.

- or - PREFERABLY -

2. NUMBER OF COPIES/TIME OF RECEIPT

Electronic proposal submissions will be required and shall be submitted utilizing the Solicitation Module at: https://piee.eb.mil/

In order to access the solicitation and submit a proposal, you must obtain access to PIEE and request the Proposal Manager role. For further support or questions, please contact PIEE at 866-618-5988 or open a ticket with https://piee.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage/vendorCustomerSupport.xhtml.

Electronic submissions sent via email or facsimile will not be accepted. Hard copy proposal submissions that are mailed, couriered, or hand delivered, etc. will not be accepted. Electronic proposals must be submitted in Adobe PDF format, and the file size must not exceed 8GB.

Submit all pages of the TECHNICAL PROPOSAL as one complete file. Submit all pages of the TECHNICAL PROPOSAL as one complete file and submit all pages of the PRICE PROPOSAL as another complete file. Multiple files of the PRICE PROPOSAL and multiple files of the TECHNICAL PROPOSAL will not be accepted.

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

61. If the Government will not consider either of the previously noted methods of electronic-only submission, will the submittal of electronic proposals via PIEE and/or email on the due date, to be followed by hard copies with wet signatures and CDs within 10 working days of the due date?

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

62. General .“4. 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.”

We recognize that the intent of this language is to prevent an offeror from presenting multiple task orders as a single "project." However, for its own convenience, the Government has on occasion issued a task order or one-off contract that contains multiple MILCON projects (each MILCON with a separate P-number). May an offeror present each MILCON project (P-number) under such a task order or contract as a "project" for the purposes of this solicitation? For example, if a relevant past contract or task order comprises three P-numbers, may the P-numbers be split to cover more than one of the five "projects" required here, assuming that individual P-number meets at least one of the two criteria?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

63. Drawing set P923, Drawing CD571 and 572. Drawings for drainage line A detail shows a medium duty manhole at the connection between a RCP and a RCBC and between 2 RCBCs.

Drawings reference CD571 and CD572 for the manhole details, which provide details for a medium duty manhole connecting to an RCP only. Please provide the details of the manhole to the RCBC connection.

ANSWER: Drawing CD572 will be revised to show the reinforcement detail at a medium duty pit where an RCBC connection is made. Amendment is forthcoming.

64. Drawing set P949 Drawing CD101. Please provided the drainage profile for drainage line DR100 for P494 package.

ANSWER: Drawing CD204 will be revised to include the updated longsection. Amendment is forthcoming.

65. Drawing set P923 Drawing EA118B. There is a note on the drawing EA118B for conduits to be backfilled with lean mix between D23 pits but pointing to only one section of conduits. Please confirm if this note is reference to a typical detail of just for this specific location only. Please confirm the extent of this backfill treatment.

ANSWER: Yes, the requirement is specific to this location only for the conduit connecting the D25 pits. The encasement is required at this location for an access road.

66. Drawing set P941 Drawing CP501. Please provide further detail for the HDPE or Polypropylene interlocking gravel pavers required for Type 12 pavement? Is there a specific proprietary product (or equivalent) that is required? The drawings reference that the paver is to be supplied for heavy traffic loads. Is there a minimum wheel load required to meet the high strength design?

ANSWER: Refer to Specification Section 32 15 00 Stabilized Gravel Pavement Surface for further details. In accordance with the UFC requirements product and manufactures names have not been nominated in the documentation. Per Specification Section 32 15 00 part 2.1, pavers must be able to obtain a maximum load capability filled with gravel of 109,960 kPA (15,940 psi).

67. Document RFP N62742-24-R-1308 Clause 1.29. Please confirm if Option No. 1 is awarded, the period for completion of all work for the construction of Project P-941 is 830 calendar days after the notice to proceed for Option No. 1 and not 830 calendar days after the notice to proceed for the base offer?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

68. Drawing CR114 P923 package. The joint type against the existing fighter replenishment apron is shown as DEJ on drawing CR114. Should this joint be the DDEJ?

ANSWER: The "DEJ - Dowelled Expansion Joint" currently shown at the interface between the P-923 Apron and the existing Fighter Replenishment Apron (FRA) will need to be a "DDEJ - Drilled and Dowelled Expansion Joint" as per detail B4 on drawing CR501.

Tenderers should note that the Fighter Replenishment Apron (FRA) is scheduled to be reconstructed a new rigid pavement by the National Airfields Works P0009 Project. The joint type at the interface between the P-923 and FRA will need to be confirmed once both the design of the P0009 project and the program for construction are finalized.

Amendment is forthcoming.

69. Drawing CP501 for P949 Aircraft Maintenance Hanger. The type 5 and type 8 rigid pavement profile have a note for an edge thickening, 2.2m distance. Are we to assume, the perimeter of these slab types has a thickening 2.2m from the outside edge of the slabs? Please confirm or provide additional information or sketches to detail the thickening locations.

ANSWER: For Type 5 and Type 8 rigid pavement profiles, note for edge thickening will be removed. SQID concrete cover slabs and edge thickening per CD401, CD402, and CD501 drawings. Amendment is forthcoming.

70. Drawing C-002 P923 Aircraft Parking Apron. Note TA 1 to 3 on drawing C-002 details the construction of a temporary sealed access road. Please provide additional details for buildings or areas that the temporary road need to be connected to.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

71. Issued drawings for P-923, P-941 and P-949. A large number of the issued PDF drawings have missing letters such as W, X, K, Y, etc. and numbers which diminish the understanding of the information on the drawings. Please reissue the complete set of legible tender drawings urgently to allow us to request pricing from the market. Examples of drawings with significant errors are for P949, CD101 to CD201, CD601, CA101, and P-923 drawings MW501 to MX601.

We believe there may have been an issue when converting the .dwg files to .pdf files prior to issue for tender.

ANSWER: Amendment to correct these errors is forthcoming.

72. P-923 package: Drawing CR110 references detail CR2 on drawing CR519. We note that on drawing CR110 it highlights the western corner of the center access to Taxiway A only.

Please confirm if detail CR2 also applies the Eastern shoulder, or other similar locations, or does it only apply to the western shoulder as highlighted?

ANSWER: The intent of the rigid pavement call-out details (drawings CR515 to CR519) is to show the typical detail arrangement for additional reinforcement i.e. trimmer bars around penetrations in the concrete. Hence detail CR2 on drawing CR519 applies to other similar locations i.e. the eastern side of the taxiway.

73. AGL shallow can installation in rigid pavement details P-923 Drawing CR111. Please confirm the installation detail of shallow base cans as drawing CR111 shows two scenarios (Shallow can detail 1 and Shallow can detail 2 as highlighted below). Please confirm the detail in section C1 on drawing CR509 is used in Detail 2 below. Additionally, please confirm the installation detail for Detail 1 below.

ANSWER: There are two installation scenarios for the AGL shallow base canisters as per the

RFI.

Shallow can detail 1 - Shallow base canister located more than 650 mm from joint location.

Shallow base canister is installed into completed concrete as per the AGL installation details. No specific rigid pavement detailing i.e. reinforcement is required in this scenario as the distance from the canister to the joint is sufficient. Canister locations are is shown for reference on CR113 to CR118.

Shallow can detail 2 - Shallow base canister is closer than 650 mm t a joint location and installation within concrete block-out is required.

Shallow base canister is installed.

74. Excavation of the existing fuel line P-923 Drawings CE505, 503 and CX501. Please confirm the use of the acronym "DSL" on drawings CE505, CE503, and CX501 is in reference to the underside of the lean mix layer, as this is inconsistent with the term "DSL" used in Apron Pavement Details on drawing CP501, where "DSL" refers to the underside of the select fill layer.

ANSWER: The acronym DSL refers to "Design Subgrade Level" as per the sheet legend on drawings CE503 and CE505. The design subgrade level for each aircraft pavement profile is shown on drawings CP501 and CP502.

The intent of the fuel pipe encasement longitudinal sections on drawing CE503 and CE505 is to document that lean mix concrete backfill is required from the top of the existing concrete encasement over the fuel line up to Design Subgrade Level - DSL (as defined above and shown as a dashed line on the longitudinal section). The note in the box above the longitudinal section states: "All Select Fill within the pavement structure between bottom of lean mix subbase and design subgrade level must be replaced with lean mix concrete over fuel line". For clarity, the lean mix concrete replacing the Select Fill within the pavement structure (above DSL) is not hatched on the longitudinal sections on CE503 and CE505 (covered with the note).

Drawing MX501 which shows the mechanical information associated with the installation of the fuel low point drain and high point vent show the lean mix concrete encasement consistent from top of existing concrete to the lean mix concrete within the pavement profile.

75. Deep can base AGL type P-923: Drawing CR506. It is unclear on the rigid pavement joint plans as to where Detail A1 is used. Please confirm if Detail A1 is relevant.

ANSWER: Drawing CR506 provides a typical detail for an AGL deep base canister installation within a concrete slab. There is currently no requirement for AGL deep base canister installation on the project and hence detail A1 is not used.

76. Apron pavement markings P-923 Drawing CM501. Please confirm if the Airfield explosive facility corner marking, detail C2 on drawing CM501, is required for this project. It is not currently detailed in the apron pavement marking drawings.

ANSWER: The 'Airfield Explosive Facility Corner Marking' (detail 2 on drawing CM501) is required. The marking is required to be applied to each corner of the Explosive Ordnance (EO) licensed area. The location of the marking must be established once the extent of the EO licensed area is confirmed by the EO Licensing Authority (EOLA) after construction.

Tenderers should allow to provide a minimum of four 'Airfield Explosive Corner Markings'. The EOLA will provide the actual OLA number to be applied and the location of the markings.

77. General. The specification for CSI Division 2 - Exiting Conditions is missing. Please provide Div 2 specifications for P923, P941 & P949.

ANSWER: The requirements have been detailed with the specification and drawing packages for the P923/P941/P949. Separate Div 02 specifications were not required.

78. RFP, Document 00 21 016 Section 1.1.a & 1.1.b: Will the Government consider providing a three (3) extension to the proposal due date?

ANSWER: The proposal due date will be extended three (3) weeks to May 9, 2024. Amendment forthcoming.

79. Specifications P941 Section 09 06 00 We note within Specification P-941 Section 09 06 00 - Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule (T-Sheet), the schedules do not nominate the products or manufacturers, only criteria. Can the client confirm that the tenderer/ Contractor is to determine a suitable product that meets the criteria? Our experience for Construct Only Contract where the Designer has developed the design that specific manufacturers/products would be nominated. Please confirm?

Examples of schedules below that we would expect the 100% design would have the products/manufacturers specified?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

80. Document 00 21 16 - Due to the duration of the contract and the continued cost impacts from the COVID pandemic impacting material, labor and logistics costs, will the Government please include FAR 52.216-4, Economic Price Adjustment – Labor and Material as well as 52.216-2 Economic Price Adjustment-Standard Supplies?

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

81. Document 00 22 00, Factor 1 – Experience, Paragraph (a)(1) a. - 82% of construction materials have experienced a significant cost increase since 2020 with an average jump of 19% according to construction industry sources. The year 2023 saw an average escalation of 4.3%.

From 2010-2020 the average annual escalation was 5% per year. Additionally, labor rates have seen similar increases globally.

Accordingly, as relevant projects can currently be up to 15 years old, will the Government allow offerors to provide relevant project value calculations incorporating price escalation to qualify the project dollar value for projects submitted under Factor 1 in order to demonstrate similar current project values to the RFP stated approximate minimum $ values?

Alternatively, will the Government please consider lowering the minimum experience magnitude dollar value for paragraph (1) a. Airfield Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavement to approximately $15M?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

82. RFP Document 00 21 16 Paragraph 1.3 states that the Government may not respond to questions submitted less than 10 business days prior to the proposal receipt due date, however will the Government please provide a date and number of days prior to the due date by which all questions submitted more than 10 days prior to the proposal due date will be answered? Due to the logistical and technical nature, as well as location of the project, incorporating answers to questions into the offer/solution may take up to 14 days.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

83. 24R1308+Note+1 posted to SAM.gov on March 20, 2024, Answer to Question 13, re:

Notices/Notes vs. Amendments and Offeror acknowledgement thereof – Does the Government intend to issue Amendments to incorporate all Q&As into the solicitation/contract, and if not are answers to questions contractually binding?

ANSWER: As noted, “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.”

Amendment to issue revisions noted in the Notice No. 1 is forthcoming.

84. NAVFAC Drawing 1730129 (Dwg CP501) the notes mentioned - PROVIDE BITUMEN

EMULSION TACK COAT BEFORE PLACING ANY ASPHALT LAYER, INCLUDING

BETWEEN LAYERS. Can the designers nominate the spread rate to be applied?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

85. P949 drawing number CD201 Can P949 drawing number CD201 (Stormwater longsection) be reissue? The current version is illegible.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

86. General - Can the full geotechnical report be released?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

87. General - After reviewing the mains and submains cable schedules for all the buildings it has been identified that there have been no earth cable sizes nominated. Will these cable sizes be made available to us, or are we to allow for the nominal earth size as per AS3000 depending the submain size?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

88. Drawing AA111 – P50 Insulated Cool Room Panel. Please provide details of this panel as this code is not within the Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule.

89. P949 -SB101 - Armory Building - Structural - Concrete Foundations & Slab Plan - Sheet 1 - ET2 is not found on Concrete Foundations and Slab Plan. Please advise location and amend drawings, if required.

90. P949 - SB101 - Armory Building - Structural - Concrete Foundations & Slab Plan - Sheet 1 - AW1 and AW2 were noted as in-situ concrete wall but with 320W corefilled comments.

Please confirm if it is 320d in-situ wall? If so, please amend drawings?

91. P949 - SB501 - Armory Building - Structural - Concrete Foundations and Slab Details - Sheet 1 - Please advise thickness of mass concrete blinding to EB1, IB1 and IB2. We have measured at 50mm throughout. Please advise otherwise and amend drawing if required?

92. P949 - S-002 - Facility Wide - Structural - Notes - Sheet 2 and SB101 - Armory Building

- Structural - Concrete Foundations & Slab Plan - Sheet 1 - Please advise concrete grade for in-situ concrete walls AW1 and AW2.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

93. P949 - SB503 - Armory Building - Structural - Concrete Wall and Masonry Details - No details shown for AW3 dowel spacing and fixing details. Please confirm 200mm cts spacing or otherwise? Please amend drawings as required.

94. P949 - Structural drawings & notes S-001 - Can structural steel installation sequencing / methodology and temporary work plans please be provided if they have been developed? Given its construct only and fully documented drawings, we are unaware of any constraints or specific sequence that the buildings are required to be installed.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

95. P923 - Electrical Package - We note the HV and lighting schedules within the 05.01 drawing set does not provide any manufacturers details. Can the designer confirm the HV equipment manufacturer details and lighting manufacturer details that the design is based upon?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

96. P923 - Electrical Package - Can the client confirm who the existing PCMS contractor is for the site?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

97. P923 - CG490 - Temporary Wash Facility Relocation and MOWP Stage 1A drawing (12583544-SK020) - Can NAVFAC confirm if there is any work restrictions to perform this work? Will NAVFAC provide key dates when this work can occur that won’t impact operations?

Is there any special inductions or working requirements to disconnect services and construct this new temporary facility?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

98. RFP Document 00 22 00, Section 2.2, Factor 1 – Experience, Note 6: Where experience and past performance is being utilized by…