24R1308 Note 6.pdf

Notice No. 6

30 April 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.

REVISED RESPONSES FROM NOTICE NO. 2 DATED 28 MARCH 2024

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

REVISED ANSWER: Existing PCMS contractor will not be provided.

RESPONSES DEFERRED FROM NOTICE NO. 2 DATED 28 MARCH 2024

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: KTR shall determine sequencing to meet the completion dates provided per Document 00 70 00, para, 1.29 FAR 52.211-10 COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND

COMPLETION OF WORK.

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: In accordance with the UFC requirements, product and manufacturers names have not been nominated in the documentation. The Contractor is to nominate products that comply with the performance requirements and specifications.

104. P941/P949 - Drawings AA621 - All acoustic doors and fire doors are nominated with a 20 year warranty however industry standard for doors is 2 years. Please advise if 2 year warranty is acceptable?

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

107. P949 - Drawings 17311336 (EA001), 17311355 (EA123) - P4 Light fitting has not been detailed on the lighting fixtures schedule on drawing EA001 however is nominated on drawing EA123. Please provide details of light fittings?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

108. Section 09 Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule Page 37/38 and Section 31 31 16.13 ‘Chemical Termite Control' For P941 and P949 - There appears to be a discrepancy between Section 09 Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule Page 37/38 and Section 31 31 16.13 ‘Chemical Termite Control' for termite management. Section 31 of the specification nominates ‘Soil Chemical application as well as Stainless Steel Mesh Barriers’ with no mention of a plastic TMB (Termite Moisture Barrier.), however, Section 09 Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule nominates plastic TMB.

It is our understanding that stainless steel mesh barriers are not approved for use in the Top End due to the Termite varieties present here including Masto Termes, so the option here would be soil chemical application. The specification requires a 5-year warranty which can’t be supplied on any soil chemical application in the Top End due to reduced chemical lifespans.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

110. Project specification- P941 Specifications-Final Package (Rev.20240216) - Section 23 05 93 Page 6 - 1.5.1.2 Qualifications - b. The specification nominates a TAB Specialist must be either a member of AABC, an experienced technician of the firm certified by the NEBB, or a supervisor certified by the TABB. However, NEBB/AABC/TABB are American standards and NEBB is no longer in Australia or supporting Australia. The Australian equivalent of NEBB is TACA. Please advise:

1. Please advise if the local Mech contractors can do all testing and commissioning in line with Australian AIRAH DA manuals?

ANSWER: Testing and commissioning can be in line with Australian AIRAH DA manuals.

2. Please advise if Mech contractors must utilize TACA (Australian equivalent of NEBB) accredited commissioning agents from interstate?

ANSWER: Mech contractors do not need to use agents from interstate.

143. P949-Drawing AB701- Where is the security screen MW13 located in the building?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

RESPONSES DEFERRED FROM NOTICE NO. 3 DATED 10 APRIL 2024

167. MH132 & MH601. MH132 references SG-3C, this is not included on the MH601 Schedule of Air Distribution Devices. Please provide the basis of design for SG-3C.

ANSWER: SG-3C module is 250mm x 100mm, mounting, material, finish, damper, border, and deflection to match others. Schedule on sheet MH-601 was revised in Amendment No. 0002.

174. General, Site Walk. During the site walk, it was noted that there is currently a contractor occupying the area assigned for this contract. In discussion with this contractor, they indicated that they were currently negotiating a follow-on contract to their current airfield rehabilitation project that will extend their duration on site until mid to late 2025. The contractor's office area, laydown area, asphalt batch plant, and aggregate stockpile areas are within the footprint of the base bid item on this project. Does the Government expect this RFP to receive a delayed NTP to account for contractors already on-site? If so, how will this affect the bid and award schedule for this NAVFAC project?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

175. General, Site Walk. During the site walk, substantial differences were noted between the design drawings and actual conditions within the parking apron and at the hangar location, apparently made by the contractor already on site. This was most notable by the site clearing and fill operations performed by the on-site contractor to establish their laydown, offices, batch plant areas, etc. After reviewing the topographical drawings for this project, it looks as though the levels have adjusted considerably, which will result in additional work for the winning bidder.

How does the Government intend to manage this changed condition? Please confirm that any changes in topographical line and level that result in additional work for the awardee will be addressed and compensated through FAR 52.243-1 Changes Fixed Price Construction.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

176. General, Site Walk. During the site walk, several very large stockpiles were noted in the area assigned for the construction of the parking apron. These stockpiles are not noted in the contract documents. Further, the stockpiles were identified by localized signage as contaminated waste. Please confirm that the awardee will not be responsible for the testing or disposal of these contaminated stockpiles.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

180. Section 01 11 00, para 1.11. The host nation requirements identified in this section will take considerable time to prepare, submit, and obtain approval for. Considering the already tight period of performance, please amend the NTP date from 21 days after the award to after the host nation's administrative requirements are complete.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

181. Section 01 11 00, para 1.11.5.4, sub para b. This paragraph states ‘without limiting the contractor’s obligations under clause 4 and 5.1, the contractor agrees that were an explosive ordnance consultation cooperation and coordination plan is required by eDEOP 101 or otherwise directed by the contracting officer], the contractor will develop and EEO CCC Plan which address…’. It is not clear within the contract documents whether this plan is required. Please advise if it is or is not required so that it can be budgeted accordingly into the cost and schedule.

Also, if required, does each CLIN/Option require its own plan or will a single plan covering the entire project site be sufficient?

ANSWER: Yes this plan is required to be completed by the Contractor. Intent is a single plan covering all three project sites.

182. Section 01 11 00.01 Para 1.1.10. This paragraph identifies the requirements for the HOTO on multiple delivery stages/or sites. As this project is split into 3 CLINS/Options, is it considered a multiple delivery in terms of HOTO or will a single HOTO plan be sufficient to meet the intent?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

185. Section 01 30 00, para 1.13.1, sub para f. In this paragraph the Government states that followon partnering sessions are required at 3-month to-6-month intervals. Facilitator costs are extremely expensive and are likely to run at approx. $70,000 USD per trip. Please advise if the Government will require the facilitator at 3 months or 6 months, and also can the follow-on sessions be performed with the facilitator remotely? This would lower the overall partnering cost considerably.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

187. Section 01 31 20 para 1.1.1. This section includes the requirements for the technical data management system. It is unclear what the objective of this section is in relation to the project. Is this section intended to be used in lieu of ECMS? Is the intent to require the contractor to establish a data processing site for storage of documents, document updates, as-built documentation, submittal transfer etc., but on a more detailed level than ECMS? Please provide a summary of what the intended outcomes of this section are and how they apply to this project.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

188. Section 01 31 20 para 1.6. This paragraph identifies the person and qualifications of the data management team. Please advise if these people are to be onsite or if they can be an off-site function.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

189. Section 01 32 17.00 20, para 1.2.2. This section states that the NAS baseline must be submitted within 30 days of notice of award. Usually, on projects of this magnitude and complexity, the Government requests an interim 90-day schedule within 30 days of award, then the NAS baseline schedule within 90 days of contract award. It will be extremely difficult to prepare and submit the NAS baseline schedule within 30 days of contract award, considering that NTP will be approx. 21 days after the award, partnering kick-off will be within 35 days of the award, and between these, the contractor is expected to arrange a meeting with the KO to discuss scheduling requirements per paragraph 1.2.1. We request that the 30 days be revised to at least 90 days in line with normal NAVFAC NAS requirements.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

190. Section 01 33 29, para 1.4.2.2 sub para a. Please confirm that the Government has obtained a third-party certification design compliance report in accordance with this paragraph requirement. Given that this is a design-bid-build project, the government is responsible for the design.

191. Section 01 33 29, para 1.5.9. Please confirm that the contractor does not have to comply with this section, as it references FISRA 9002 USDA programs that are not applicable in the host nation and have no impact on the sustainability requirements within Australia.

ANSWER: Paragraph to be revised in forthcoming amendment.

194. Section 01 57 19, para 1.4.1.1 and 1.5.4. The paragraph identifies the requirements for the environmental manager position. Please clarify if this a full-time on-site dedicated position or if it can be filled via weekly or as-required inspections.

ANSWER: Paragraphs to be revised in forthcoming amendment.

196. Div 01 General. Throughout Division 1, there are multiple references to the Construction Manager and Project Manager, but there are no performance criteria set forth for either position.

We would normally expect the Government to require a full-time on-site project manager who is authorized to negotiate and act on behalf of the Prime contractor. Please clarify that these positions can be served by the same person as they typically would on projects of this magnitude.

ANSWER: Please refer to Specification 01 30 00, Clause 1.8.1 - Superintendent Qualifications.

Positions can be served by same person.

198. General: Can the client confirm if any height or location restriction exist in the project footprint should mobile batching plants be established onsite? Can the client confirm the approval process to establish and operate onsite batching plants for the duration of the works?

ANSWER: Yes, there is an Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) for the airfield. The OLS of 73.1m AHD applies south of the Bomber Replenishment apron.

The following approval process is required to establish and operate onsite batching plants for the duration of the works:

• An Obstacle height assessment form from BASO or BAO will need to be completed, reviewed and approved by base.

• Refer Specification 01 14 00, clause 1.9 – Traffic Management Plan.

• Refer Specification 01 14 00, clause 1.10 – Use of Bombing Road Access Gate for Project Vehicle Access

202. P941/P949 - Discrepancy of CE30 between Finishes Specification And ceiling legend on architectural drawings. Measurements refer to specification (16mm plasterboard lining). Please advise?

ANSWER: CE30 should be 16mm as per T-Sheet. Refer to Amendment No. 0002.

204. P941 - Dwg SA114 - Concrete Plan - First Floor - Part D, AA116 - Enlarged Floor Plan - First Floor - Sheet 2 - There is a discrepancy to concrete hob height. 100mm high indicated on structural drawing and 50mm high on architectural drawing. Please clarify?

ANSWER: P949 AA116 & AA118 - Where concrete hob is provided for Drywall partition, use 100mmH as per SA114 drawing. Where concrete hob is provided for Blockwall type (MA01 along grid D, 10-11 First floor), concrete hob should be 50mmH (as per wet area setdown) to ensure Blockwork coursing align and start at FFL level - refer to wall section detail A1/DWG

AA524.

Refer to Amendment No. 0002

208. P941 - Dwg AB125 - Wall Setout Plan, AB601 - Room Finish Schedule, Finishes Specification (P.82/202) - C0006 mentioned apply concrete sealer and paint finish to all concrete wall, but refer to room finishes schedule and Finishes specification, only concrete sealer (PA50) apply to concrete wall. Please advise?

ANSWER: Finishing specification to 320mm thick, armory interior walls will be penetrative sealer as specified and an applied compatible epoxy paint (off white) over the top of the penetrative sealer.

AB125 and AB601 will be revised. C005 and C006 description will be revised to clarify application of concrete sealer and paint type.

Amendment is forthcoming.

239. Specification - Section 23 30 00, 23 81 00, 23 64 10 - Coil coatings Project specification- P949 Specifications Final- Section 23 30 00 HVAC air distribution - Page 20 - Part 2 Products -

2.10 Air Systems Equipment - 2.10.4 Coils: Notes to provide factory applied polymer e-coating of entire coil. Coating rated for corrosion protection of 10,000-hour salt spray test.

Project specification- P949 Specifications Final- Section 23 81 00 Decentralized Unitary HVAC Equipment - Page 8 - Part 2 Products - 2.3 Equipment - 2.3.1.2 Large-Capacity Split- System Air Conditioners (Greater Than 19 kW) - 2.3.1.2.1 Air-To-Refrigerant Coil: Notes, coating process must ensure complete coil encapsulation and be capable of withstanding a minimum 1,000 hours exposure to the salt spray test specified in ASTM B117 using a 5 percent sodium chloride solution.

Project specification- P949 Specifications Final- Section 23 81 00 Decentralized Unitary HVAC Equipment - Page 8 - Part 2 Products - 2.3 Equipment - 2.3.1 Mini-Split-System Air Conditioners - 2.3.1.1 Small-Capacity Split-System Air-Conditioners (Not Exceeding 19 kW) -

2.3.1.1.1 Air-To-Refrigerant Coil: Notes, coating process must ensure complete coil encapsulation and be capable of withstanding a minimum 1,000 hours exposure to the salt spray test specified in ASTM B117 using a 5 percent sodium chloride solution.

Project specification- P949 Specifications Final- Section 23 64 10 Water Chillers, Vapor Compression Type - Page 11 - Part 2 Products - 2.7 Fabrication - 2.7.3 Coil Corrosion Protection: Notes, coating must be capable of withstanding a minimum 3,000-hour exposure to the salt spray test.

The specification nominates 10,000 hours salt spray corrosion protection for coils, however, further in this spec, specifically for other equipment, it nominates different corrosion protection hours, namely 500, 1000 and 3000 hours.

Please advise which equipment under the 2.10 Air System Equipment – 2.10.4 Coils, specifically requires corrosion protection salt spray tests, to 10,000 hours?

ANSWER: Provide coating rated for corrosion protection of 10,000-hour salt spray test for the air handling units, DOAS units and any other 100% outside air coils. Also included are the air cooled condensing unit coils and the chiller condensing coils.

P949 spec 23 64 10 and 23 81 00 will be revised in a forthcoming amendment.

240. Specification - Section 23 64 10 Chiller Condenser Coils Project specification- P941 Specifications-Final Package (Rev.20240216)- SECTION 23 64 10 Page 10 - 2.5.9 Air-Cooled Condenser Coil: Notes, condenser coil must be of the extended-surface fin-and-tube type and must be constructed of seamless copper tubes with compatible copper fins. Of the reputable chiller manufactures that are used in Darwin only one of them capable of delivering copper tubes with copper fins on their condenser coil.

Please advise if chiller condenser coils constructed of Aluminum microchannel, which is now commonly provided by chiller manufacturers will be accepted as an alternative to coils constructed of copper tubes and copper fins?

ANSWER: Microchannel coils will not be acceptable. However, in addition to copper fin-and-tube, using coated aluminum fins will be acceptable. The coating will be per paragraph ‘Coil Corrosion Protection’ within 23 64 10. In addition, the entire coil assembly will be encapsulated in the coating, with pre-coated fin stock not being acceptable.

241. P941 - Dwg 17310628 (MA601) Chiller Refrigerant Mechanical drawing – NAVFAC drawing number 17310628 (MA-601) – Chillers: this clause requires the use of R-32 refrigerant for the Chillers, however, very few manufactures can provide R-32 for air-cool chillers in Darwin.

Please advise if other zero ODP refrigerants will be accepted as opposed to chillers with R32 refrigerant?

ANSWER: Yes, other refrigerants having a zero ODP and a GWP value comparable to R-32, will be acceptable. Amendment forthcoming.

247. CLIN Schedule Note #10 states: The total price for CLINs 0001 through 0003, and CLINs 0005 through 0006 shall be exclusive of the Australian Goods and Services Tax. See Section 01 11 00 General Requirements, Australian Requirements Schedule, paragraph 10 GST, for tax reimbursement procedures.

Section 01 11 00 Par 1.11.10 GST states: Aside from providing a completed "U.S. Government - Confirmation of Purchase" form to the Contractor, the U.S. Government shall not be responsible for the reimbursement of the Australian Goods and Services Tax.

These two requirements are inherently contradictory. The US Government cannot require contractors to excluded GST from their final price and simultaneously say it will “not be responsible for the reimbursement of Australian GST,” paid by the Prime. This leaves the contractor at full risk of not being reimbursed by the Australian Government, and having no guarantee for reimbursement from the US Government either.

Will the government please delete the paragraph from Section 01 11 00 Par 1.11.10 GST referenced above, that states the government will not provide a guarantee for reimbursement?

This will allow the Contractor to seek a Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA), in the event the Australian Government refuses to reimburse the Prime for its GST liability. Alternatively, will the Government please consider including a cost reimbursable CLIN specifically for Australian GST, so it can consider the Prime’s Price that is exclusive of the estimated GST liability, which will be handled as a cost reimbursable CLIN by the US Government in the rare event the GST is not reimbursed by the Australian Government?

ANSWER: Please refer to Notice No. 5.

249. In response to Notice No. 2 Item 31, clarifying the extents of the high temperature resistant concrete, can the designer confirm the areas of the epoxy resin surface sealer extents are shown in drawing P923 - CP130 only and not required on the Helipads or Aircraft Rinse? Please confirm?

ANSWER: Confirmed. The epoxy resin surface sealant extents are shown on drawing CP130.

i.e. not required on Helipads or Aircraft Rinse.

250. P923 - Drawing E-680 and E-681 show submains going to motors, pumps and sensors.

Can you please provide the submain Cabe size?

ANSWER: The contractor is to size the cabling to the motors based on the selected equipment ratings. Please refer note 4 on sheet E-680 and note 4 on sheet E-681.

251. P923 - SECTION 32 13 14.13 Airfield and Other Heavy Duty Pavements

• Clause 2.3.1.4 specifies a 20 mm nominal maximum aggregate with 95 to 100% passing the 19.0 mm sieve.

• Clause 2.3.2.3 specifies a 40 mm nominal maximum aggregate with 10% retained on the

26.5 mm sieve.

• Clause 2.13.2 Proportioning Studies Table 16 specifies a 40 mm nominal maximum aggregate.

Please confirm which Clause is correct?

ANSWER: Reference to be revised to provide clarification in forthcoming amendment.

Clause 2.3.1.4 specifies combined aggregate gradation for other heavy duty pavements i.e. not aircraft pavements.

Clause 2.3.2.3 specifies requirements for aircraft pavements which are to be read in conjunction with 2.3.1.3.

Clause 2.13.2 provides an alternative grading where necessary to meet surface and consolidation requirements.

252. Regarding allowable cement types:

SECTION 32 11 36.13 Lean Concrete Base Concrete Clause 2.2.1 allow cement Types GP, GL and GB.

SECTIONS 32 13 13.43 and 32 13 14.13 allow cement Types GP and GB however are silent on Type GL.

Type GL and GP are both available in Darwin. Type GL with 15% limestone offers significant carbon reduction.

Due to paving program and changing of concrete mixes, the cement type for lean concrete and high strength concrete must be the same. Would Type GL be acceptable for High Temperature (SECTIONS 32 13 13.43) and High Strength Concrete (SECTION 32 13 14.13) if all concrete properties are achieved?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

253. Regarding concrete 21 day Drying Shrinkage; SECTION 32 13 13.43 High Temperature Concrete Clause 3.14.5.2 Hold Points Table has Drying Shrinkage within Hold Point submission ‘Placing of Concrete in Subsequent Work Period’ as a requirement however there is no other Drying Shrinkage conformance limit nor frequency within SECTION 32 13 13.43.

Please confirm if Drying Shrinkage is required, if so, tested at what stage and frequency? Must be noted that there are no laboratory humidity rooms in Darwin with all Shrinkage Bars being air freighted interstate.

ANSWER: Dry Shrinkage requirements to be added in specification in a forthcoming amendment.

254. Regarding concrete 21 day Drying Shrinkage, SECTION 32 13 14.13 High Strength Concrete:

• Clause 2.12.8 specifies a Drying Shrinkage limit without testing frequency.

• Clause 3.12.2 Testing and Inspection Requirements does not list any Drying Shrinkage testing frequency.

• Clause 3.13.2 Hold Points has Drying Shrinkage required for ‘Placing of Concrete in Subsequent Work Period’.

Noting that there are no laboratory humidity rooms in Darwin with all Shrinkage Bars being air freight to Interstate, please confirm that Shrinkage are only submitted with each Trial Mix Hold Point?

ANSWER: Dry Shrinkage requirements to be added in specification in a forthcoming amendment.

255. There appears to be a discrepancy between the PIT SCHEDULE on Drawings CD602, CD603 and CD604 and the drawings. In those three drawings there are (5) Stormwater Quality Improvement Devices, (SQID) listed: SQIDN1, SQID N2, SQID N3, SQID N4 and AQID N5.

On drawing CD118 we found SQID N6 but it was not listed on the PIT SCHEDULE.

Will the government please advise?

ANSWER: Please refer to drawings as follows for the each of SQID:

SQID N1 - CD603

SQID N2 - CD603

SQID N3 - CD603

SQID N4 - CD604

SQID N5 - CD603

SQID N6 - CD602

REVISED RESPONSES FROM NOTICE NO. 4 DATED 15 APRIL 2024

287. Amendment 1 – Drawing list vs drawings. In amendment 1 for P923, the amendment provides a list of revised drawings. Drawings CD572 and CD573 are included in the list but the drawings appear to be missing. Will the government please provide the revised drawings CD572 and CD573?

REVISED ANSWER: Revised CD572 accompanied Amendment No. 0002. CD573 will not be revised.

290. We note that in Amendment 1 (24R1308_AMD01) drawings CD572 and CD573 are listed as being a revised. However, drawings CD572 and CD573 are not included in addendum 24R1308_AMD01. Could NAVFAC please issue the revised drawings CD572 and CD573?

REVISED ANSWER: Revised CD572 accompanied Amendment No. 0002. CD573 will not be revised.

RESPONSES DEFERRED FROM NOTICE NO. 4 DATED 15 APRIL 2024

256. P-941 Hangar, DWG S-511 and SA 511. Please confirm the layer under the P-941 Hangar slab. Details on drawing SA511 show a 50 mm blinder with a 0.2 mm damp proof membrane but section D2 on drawing S-511 has a 7 mm spray seal on a 200 mm later of lean mix placed on a 300 mm thick layer of select fill.

ANSWER: P949 Hangar:

Subbase as per S-511, with a 7mm spray seal and 200mm of lean mix is correct. This is applicable through section A1 on SA511. SA511 see Amendment No. 0002.

257. P-941, Drawing CE0001. Please supply the Light pole footing design for the LP1 to LP5 lights.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

258. P-949 Drawing CE102 and P941 Drawing CE103. These drawings show the location of the EV distribution board; however, they do not show the location of the future EV charging station, therefore, we are unable to quantify the conduit installation that is required to be installed from the Distribution boards to the future charging site. Please provide a location and conduit sizing and route for these locations.

ANSWER: Drawing CE103 indicates 14 carpark spaces for future EV charging, indicated by a shaded area. It is anticipated that there will be 7 EV dual-charger pedestals installed along the eastern edge of the carpark, adjacent to the 7 pits indicated. Refer note 3. Also, see conduit tag legend on drawing CE001. 2x 80mm dia HD PVC conduits indicated.

259. General Enquiry Authority Approvals. Under construction contracts in Australia, there are multiple authority approvals that fall under the client responsibilities. These authority approvals are generally sourced prior to and post construction and revolve around the authority approval for the design of multiple services, which include but are not limited to the following:

- Fire Engineering

- Building Surveyor

- Local fire authority

- EPA

- Power authority

- Water authority

- Sewer authority

- DEEP

- Airport firefighting service

This project will require coordination with multiple agencies. For example, under the fire protection authority, generally the designer or client would have coordinated all fire design requirements across the building, local firefighting office, and national firefighting service to ensure the design complies with the fire protection requirements.

Please confirm that authority approvals for the project are sourced and not the contractor's responsibility to perform. If not, please advise who the contractor is to coordinate with for each approval authority and confirm any changes to the design documents that result in cost of schedule impact to the contractor arising from changes needed to meet authority approval requirements will be addressed through the changes FAR clauses.

ANSWER: The project has submitted the required approvals to the relevant authorities.

260. Part B P-923 Specification Section 21 13 13, para 1.4.3 Regulatory Requirements.

Paragraph 1.4.3 states, interpret reference to "authority having jurisdiction" and/or AHJ in referenced standards to mean the Head or Acting Head of the office of Naval Facilities Engineering Command Pacific, Fire Protection Engineering as well as applicable Australian local authorities who will review and approve the work included in this specification section.

Advisory provision, recommendation, interim technical amendment, and appendix explanatory material in referenced standards are mandatory requirements; wherever the word "should" appears in referenced standards must be substituted with "shall".

Under this paragraph, it appears the template UFGS paragraph has not been amended or deleted as part of the specification design process. Please confirm that the above paragraph is not applicable to the project. If not, please clarify the paragraph and amend it accordingly utilizing the bracketing process.

261. General design statement. Is there a design statement from the designers that their design complies with the specification?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

262. Aircraft Hangar-Architecturals-AA115. Are bollards required for the sides of double doors for protection from forklifts? If yes, please identify bollard type and locations.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

263. Hangar - TR2 Roof Trusses- Structural. The large section of the TR2 trusses is 5.1 m wide, which is too wide to transport without police escort etc. Can splices be added to reduce the width of the truss?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

264. Aircraft Hangar-Architecturals-AA521. Details C1 & C2: Why is there structural plywood running between angles between purlins, what is its intended purpose?

ANSWER: The purpose of these plywood is for security barrier and acoustics. To comply with security requirements in Australia and NCC22 and Acoustic Engineers design.

265. P949 Aircraft Hangar-Architectural DWG-AA521. Details C1 appears to be missing the supports for the cladding. Please advise what supports are required in the missing location.

Detail C2 appears to show a detail that cannot be built, further there is a lack of fixing details for the cladding and flashing and the purlins are extending into a solid wall piece. Please clarify the detail.

Detail C3 shows the adjoining lower roof where it meets the vertical wall. There does not appear to be any structural member in place to catch the roof. Please clarify these details.

Detail B1 shows the canopy along the front of the rolling doors. The canopy appears to be missing safety mesh and the correct detail for capping. It is also missing the guttering system.

Please clarify this detail.

Detail A 1 shows the hanger door bottom assembly. This assembly is missing a drain location, please confirm if a drain is required and if so where to connect the drain. Also, the plate that holds the rails appears to be floating on two anchor bolts. Please provide the structural calculation for the plate size and bolt details.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

266. P949, Aircraft Hangar-Architectural- DWG AA522. Various notation arrows have no notations. Please correct all the notations or remove them to avoid any confusion between the bidders. The issue continues through all drawings sets.

ANSWER: Call-outs without notations will be revised in a forthcoming amendment.

267. P949 Aircraft Hangar-Architectural- DWG AA524. Detail C1 shows the purling extending into the structural steel. The block work that the steel sits on is at a set height that is the same as the building roof fixed height. To correct the purling member clash, either the blockwork would need to be lowered or the roof made higher. Please clarify which option should be considered.

Detail Al shows the block work wall to foundation detail. Please advise why a full block was not considered in the detail and advise on missing weep holes. Further, the availability of masons in the region is extremely low; therefore, the market has adapted to utilizing pre-cast concrete for wall details. Would the Government consider revising the scope to change the block work walls to pre-cast concrete? This would significantly benefit the schedule and project quality.

Detail A3 shows the lower wall transition to vertical steel-clad wall. The detail is missing the girt that allows the roof to be structurally fixed to the wall. It also shows the roof member protruding through the wall frame. Please clarify these points in the detail to avoid contractor confusion.

268. P949 - Hangar Drawing EA 001. The P4 light fitting has no details located in the Maintenace Hangar. Please provide the details for the P4 lighting unit. The lighting code is included in multiple rooms, but the legend and details do not show the type of light fixture required.

ANSWER: The P4 luminaire will be added to the schedule. Amendment is forthcoming.

269. Electrical - P941 - Facilities Drawing EA 110. Maintenance Facility EA110 shows frequency converters panels but there are no details on size or type. Please provide the details to prepare the bid accordingly.

ANSWER: Frequency converter ratings are indicated on single line diagram, sheet EA602.

Ratings vary. Provide 75kVA for 60Hz and 40Hz for 400Hz.

270. General Enquiry -Fire Engineering Report. Is there a fire engineering report and what is the status of approval? This document is normally provided to the contractor and is produced during the design stage. It lists the approval process taken by the agencies and any guidelines that need to be adhered to by the approving agency.

ANSWER: A Fire Engineering Report and formal dispensation form has been prepared and submitted. The approval authority (DEEP) has advised endorsement of the performance solutions and dispensations.

271. P949 Plumbing drawing P-002 and PA105. Not all items are shown in legend such as FW symbols. Please update the legends and details accordingly to ensure all materials are covered in the proposal.

ANSWER: Plumbing legend/symbols were revised in Amendment No. 0002.

272. General Enquiry Structural and Civil Independent Certification. General Enquiry Structural and Civil Independent Certification would be required by the Building Surveyor, but this does not appear to be mentioned in the solicitation documents. Please tell us where this is mentioned in solicitation documents.

Please advise on the status of the structural engineering approval. This approval is usually completed at design stage and ensures that the structural design is in conformance with Australian building regulations. Also, please advise who is responsible for the independent structural certification, which is required by a Building Surveyor as part of the building permit process. The Building Surveyor is the regulatory authority that issues the building permit which is needed in order to commence any building works. If the contractor is responsible, please provide details of the requirements and agencies needed to be coordinated for the sign-off process.

ANSWER: Design certification has been provided to the Building Certifier for the project.

The Contractor is responsible for the construction certification as detailed in specification 01 45 35.

273. General Enquiry Acoustic Report. Please advise if an acoustic report has been completed for the project. Under normal Australian building practices, the acoustic report is completed at the design stage and gives details required for the bidder to meet the building envelope requirements. If no report has been performed, what acoustic and envelope requirements/Australian standards are to be followed and achieved.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

274. General Enquiry ESD Report. Please advise is an Energy (ESD) report has been completed on the project. Under normal Australian building practices, the energy report is completed at the design stage and gives details required for the bidder to meet the building energy requirements. If no report has been performed, what energy requirements/Australian standards are to be followed and achieved.

ANSWER: Yes, a ESD report including energy modelling results and NCC/BCA section J compliance review was completed during the design phase.

The performance requirements from the ESD report has been included within the specification and drawings.

Compliance with section J NCC2022.

275. P949 Hanger DWG AA514. Detail A3 shows a canopy roof between a lower block wall and higher steel wall. The connection detail to both walls is missing. Please provide this connection detail.

Detail A4 shows an incomplete detail at the point of wall and roof connection. The detail shows the wood deck boards protruding into the steel and no detail to fix it to the structural steel. Also, the guttering system appears to not be present and could pose water penetration issues in the wall siding. Also, there is no deflector flashing from the roof. Please advise on correct details.

ANSWER: Acknowledged. Connection detail for the chimney cover will be provided.

The connection detail at the point of wall and roof connection including the boards protruding into the steel will be revised. Flashing to be provided. No gutters to be provided at the Emergency Generator Room roof. Amendment is forthcoming.

276. General Enquiry Room Data Sheets. In Australian Defence projects contracts, room data sheets are provided. These sheets document every item in that room, such as lights, sinks, tables, projects etc. Please provide them to ensure all items are covered. Also, please advise if the contractor is to provide these upon project completion.

277. P941- AB151. The Armory building shows some rooms have a concrete ceiling yet at the same time is showing recessed 1200x300 lights in the same building. This does not seem logical as having a penetration this large in a secure area would pose significant threats to security.

Please advise if this light fixture is correct or if a surface mounted light fixture should be used instead.

ANSWER: Lighting fixture at AB151 Legend will be revised to surface mounted 1200mm x 600mm LED Troffer. Amendment is forthcoming.

278. General Enquiry Section marks. There seems to be no consistency in the section cut outs in the various plan drawings. Normally, we would see a detail drawing for each identified section from the plan drawings but in these documents, the section drawings are limited. Also of the limited section drawings, they are not constant across the disciplines. This causes confusion, especially in the modeling process. Please provide all section drawings as noted in the project drawings.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

279. P-941 DWG AA126. Consum storage shows internal blockworks, but blockwork is not shown on structural drawing SA106. Please clarify the correct detail.

ANSWER: Structural drawings to be revised to match architecture drawings. Amendment is forthcoming

280. P941 DWG AA125. Wall between amenities 043,044 and open office 038 shown as a stud wall on the Architectural drawings but blockwork on structural drawing SA105, please clarify which is the correct details.

ANSWER: Follow structural drawing which Blockwork to support the ceiling. Arch will be revised. Amendment is forthcoming

281. P941 DWG SA106. Lithium battery store cupboard block walls are shown on AA126, but not on structural drawings, please clarify correct detail.

ANSWER: Structural drawings to be revised to match architecture drawings. Amendment is forthcoming

282. Please confirm Pump Duties for the Fire Services pumps. It is unclear in the documentation the exact duties required.

ANSWER: Please refer to fire booster pump capacities listed on Sheet MF110 with the Key Notes 9 through 12 for fire pumps and Key Note 17 for pressure maintenance pump as well as in Specification 21 30 00 Section 2.2. Also, Specification 21 30 00 Section 1.2 describes sequencing of the fire pumps.

283. General, Fire Protection. Please confirm the water storage tank sizes for the fire system supply.

ANSWER: Please refer to Sheet MF320 below Table A Note 1, which states that the tank working capacity must be 1.25 ML. In addition, tank capacities are listed in Specification 33 16 15 Section 2.1.1.

284. Please advise where the underground fire services drawings are detailed as we need to include this scope within the Fire Services Package. Previous experience has shown us that it is crucial that this portion of work be included in the Fire Services Package to ensure compliance and certification is achieved. It is critical that we have the correct pipe installed as it impacts both the pump and tank sizes. This underground works includes all the external hydrants, connections between the water tanks and the fire pumps and the connections from the pumps to the individual buildings.

ANSWER: For P923, underground fire services drawings are in the CF drawing series (Volume 2, Section 04.04 Civil Utilities - Fire Water) and the MF drawing series (Volume 3, Section 07.01).

For P941, underground fire services drawings are in the CW drawing series (Volume 1, Section

04.02 Civil Utilities - Wet Utilities).

For P949, underground fire services drawings are in the CW drawing series (Volume 1, Section

04.02 Civil Utilities - Wet Utilities).

285. DWG SA 113 and SB 101 Structural blockwall types. Please clarify the structural loading information requirements for each of the block wall detail types as the information is not clear in the documents. Also, some walls are shown as block in the structural drawings and not in the architectural drawings. Please clarify on the drawings, which detail takes precedence.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

286. Construction Environmental Management Plan - Cl10.8. Excess spoil has been identified while undertaking earthworks modelling for the cut to fill operation. The Construction Environmental Management Plan - Cl10.8 Identifies a permanent spoil location for Category 3 and 4 PFAS soils at a location adjacent to the solar farm, please confirm permanent spoil location for non PFAS contaminated material and identify the location of the stockpile adjacent to the solar farm.

ANSWER: Response deferred.

288. P923 - Further to NAVFAC’s response provided in Note 2 – item 55, the tenderer notes that there will be significant excess topsoil that cannot be re-used in the final works (not geotechnically suitable for structural fill and excess of topsoil) and excavated material generated from the site wide new infrastructure is likely to be excess at the completion of the project. Note

2, item 55 states to remain within the project footprint however will not be possible to complete the works.

We note within P-923 100% Final Construction Management Plan dated December 2023, the document notes that excess soil will be stockpiled on base at nominated stockpile locations in accordance with the RAAF Darwin PFAS Spoil Management Plan subject to capacity limits.

Please confirm if the project can utilize this nominated stockpile location, confirm the location of the nominated stockpile locations at RAAF Darwin, the capacity limits and current available capacity?

The document also suggests should the capacity be reached, alternative storage locations nominated will require a Site Selection Board (SSB) process. Please confirm if NAVFAC will complete this or the tenderer?

Previous Bomber Apron tender for NAVAFC at RAAF Base Tindal clearly noted where the stockpile locations were nominated that ensured no confusion in preparing the estimate.

ANSWER: Please refer to the P923 CEMP Section 10.8. dot point two for the approved permanent stockpile location for material that cannot be reused on the site.

The stockpile location has capacity for material that is unable to be reused on the site.

There is no requirement for the SSB to be completed as the approved stockpile location has sufficient capacity.

289. We note within P-923 100% Final Construction Management Plan dated December 2023, it notes that soil contained with Asbestos can be stockpiled at the permanent asbestos containment cell at RAAF Base Darwin subject to capacity limits. Can you confirm if the asbestos cell is available for the project, capacity of the permanent asbestos containment cell at RAAF Base Darwin or all will be required to be removed offsite?

ANSWER: As per P923 Drawing C-002, Note ST.2 ACM is required to be removed off site to a registered waste facility.

291. Design Drawings - drawing description errors - missing letters in words and doesn’t make sense haven’t been amended in Amendment 1. Examples are P-923 volume 1 - drawings T660, MP541, MP542, MP543, MX601, and MS301.

ANSWER: These drawings will be revised in forthcoming amendment.

292. P941 - Dwg FA105 and FA106, can the designer provide clarification for what i.e.

M102, M103, M104 is reference too on the drawing? There is no legend or reference associated with this?

293. P-941 Dwg CT501 - We have not been able to source pricing on the specified 5pin solid state surge protection and mounting bases to suit 50pair telephone cable (0.64) on VAN Pedestal Enclosures.

Can we please be provided a part number and manufacturer that would meet this requirement?

ANSWER: In accordance with the UFC requirements, product and manufacturers names cannot be nominated.

294. P941/P949 - Specification 09 Finishes - Architectural Finishes and Components Schedule (T-Sheet) - External windows have been nominated with Aluminum frames with GL01 & GL02: These window systems are not blast-resistant, but they are required to be blast-resistant, as shown in the schedule.

The standard that is referenced for Storm is an American standard 16-CFR 1201. It has no relevance to the Australian market. ASTM C1172 is an international manufacturing standard for laminated products.

Please advise on the above and provide the below requested information to establish product type and conformity:

o A load rating of what resistance is required. (What size blast are we protecting against)?

o An individual destructive blast test using TNT to measuring resistance to the same and product impact on protecting the internal environment?

o The Blast resistant glass needs to be installed with a steel frame?

Please clarify?

295. P941/P949 - Specification 08 71 00 Door Hardware Schedule - Item OT2 is shown within the Building Door Hardware schedule however is not listed or described within the Door Hardware Notes & Legend

ANSWER: Response deferred.

296. P941/P949 - Specification 08 71 00 Door Hardware Schedule - Please advise if the Project Master Keying is to be an Australian System Master Keying or an American System Master Keying system?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

297. P941 - Dwg AA153 & AA411 - Wall type to rooms 050 to 053 - Lobby, Male / shower/ lockers, Female / shower/ lockers and DDA PWD rooms:

ꞏ Drawing AA153 nominates the wall types within the Building.

ꞏ The wall types to these rooms are not shown with these rooms referencing to drawing AA411 for further details. The wall types however are not noted on AA411. Please advise what wall types are to these rooms?

ANSWER: Response deferred.

NOTICE NO. 6

298. In Plans CR110 and CR514, a paving of 8 panels is shown on the left most side of the apron connecting to Bomber Replenishment Apron and seems to not coincide with existing panels, however, no dimensions were given. Will the Government confirm that the graphic scale shall be used for the paving and jointing or will the Government provide actual dimensions for the panel jointing?

ANSWER: Drawings (CR110, CR113, CR514 and CL104) will be revised so new joints match existing joint widths (indicatively 5 m). Amendment is forthcoming.

299. No Division 2 specification has been provided for demolition works and potential asbestos remediation works to be encountered. Will the Government provide Division 2 specification for this project?

300. P941 Wet Utilities Site Plans CW101-CW105 and P949 Wet Utilities Site Plans CW101- CW103 have callouts for reinforced concrete jacket but unlike P923’s Plans CS116-CS123 and CS140-CS150, no length of the concrete jacket has been indicated on the callout. Will the Government provide the length of the Reinforced Concrete Jacket for each callout on P941 and P949?

ANSWER: Lengths of the reinforced concrete jackets will be provided on the CW drawings for P941 and P949; and on the CW and CF drawings for P923. Amendment is forthcoming.

301. The RFP document states that the tendered sum shall be in US dollars and that The Contracting Officer may exercise the priced options at the time of award or by written notice to the Contractor within 365 calendar days from the date of contract award.

Given the tenderers are required to make provisions for the foreign exchange risk for 365 days after award for the priced options 1-4, (Clause FAR 52.217-7, OPTION FOR INCREASED QUANTITY-SEPARATELY PRICED LINE ITEM (MAR 1989)), as an alternative to provide a better value for money for NAVFAC, would NAVFAC consider changing the contract value and priced options to Australian Dollars to minimize this risk and provide a better value for money to

NAVFAC?

ANSWER: RFP remains unchanged.

302. Given the quantity of outstanding RFIs, pending Amendment(s) not yet issued coupled with the time required to sufficiently review forthcoming RFI responses and adequately incorporate those elements into our proposal, we respectfully request an additional two-week extension to the proposal due date to May 23rd.

ANSWER: Proposal due date was extended to 23 May 2024 via Amendment No. 0002.

303. We refer to the recently received Notice No. 4 and note that that responses to 77 questions remain deferred and we await 34 forthcoming amendments. We will need these responses and amendments to on-forward to our key supply chain partners to capture the final scope and specifications as amended. We note further that a number of the outstanding responses are crucial to being able to submit pricing that reflects a conforming RFP offer.

Given the late stage of the RFP period and the impending cut-off time for submission of further questions next week, we respectfully request a further 4 week extension to the closing date for RFP submission.

ANSWER: Proposal due date was extended to 23 May 2024 via Amendment No. 0002.

304. Drawing no. CW001. Note 28 requires the existing water distribution system to be operational at all times.

Note 29 requires continuous water service and fire protection to existing facilities.

There is insufficient…