210723 IndustryDayResponse.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND PACIFIC

258 MAKALAPA DR STE 100

PEARL HARBOR HI 96860-3134

P-209 INDUSTRY DAY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

23 July 2021

INDUSTRY DAY FOR FY23 MILCON P-209, DRY DOCK 3 REPLACEMENT

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, HAWAII

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

NOTE: No final decisions have been made with regards to P-209 which is subject to cancellation or change as a result of ongoing environmental impact analysis.

The following provides responses to questions received prior to, during and after the P-209 Industry Day held on July 14, 2021.

1. Does the Gov’t intend to issue all of the scope of work included on the Industry Day notice in one project, or multiple projects?

ANSWER: The P-209 construction will be in one task order.

2. Pearl Harbor is known to contain unexploded ordnance (UXO) / Munitions and Explosives of Concern (MEC) including in and around the piers. Does the Navy plan to include MEC response / support requirements as part of the prime dredging contract(s), or will that be a separate contract?

ANSWER: MEC dredging and screening will be part of the construction contract. The construction contractor is responsible for the final disposition of any munitions found unless it is handled by Navy EOD. Additional guidance will be provided in the RFP and to the construction contractor.

3. Are source documents available related to MEC for planned / future and/or past dredging projects (e.g., Explosive Safety Submissions, ESSDRs)?

ANSWER: Source documents (past dredging projects) may be released at a future date if determined to be beneficial. ESS and ESSDR's will not be made available.

4. When the P-209 solicitation is released, will any of the RFP documents (PWS, Drawings, Specs) have CUI/CDI requirement?

ANSWER: CUI/CDI designations have not been determined yet.

5. Question is regarding the plan issuance of set of drawings before on BetaSAM.gov before the Industry Day Event. Will the Government also post initial specifications?

ANSWER: No. Draft specifications will not be posted at this time.

6. Since there was already an establish cost range for the P-209 Dry Dock 3 Replacement project, will the DoD issue a 1391C form for this project?

ANSWER: We do not intend to issue the 1391 to industry at this time. The Navy has not finalized the programming for P-209.

7. Are there any schedule limitations on In-Water activities such as dredging, piling and underwater concrete works due to environmental concerns? (e.g. Coral spawning, sea creatures, etc.)

ANSWER: Natural resource consultations with National Marine Fisheries Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) are in process. These documents will determine how to first, avoid and minimize environmental impacts with best management practices (BMPs), and second, mitigate environmental impacts.

BMPs, such as (1) a need for qualified Endangered Species Act observers during dredging activities or (2) dredging at night in areas known to contain munitions to minimize the impact to shipyard activities will be required as part of the construction contractor’s scope.

8. Please provide the on-going projects and current operations within the project area so that the Contractor will be able to strategize the method of coordination with the existing entities.

ANSWER: We intend to coordinate this aspect of construction with MACC Contractors after award of the MACC.

9. Please clarify if H2B workers from foreign countries are not allowed to work in this project.

ANSWER: Any Alien working on Joint-Base Pearl-Harbor Hickam must be able to register in the DBIDS system which requires the following minimum documentation: Registration Number, Expiration date, Date of Entry, Port of Entry.

10. Please clarify if the disposal of dredge materials will be by ocean disposal or will the Government provide Confined Disposal Facilities (CDFs)?

ANSWER: Disposal of dredge material will be the responsibility of the construction contractor.

Open ocean disposal is one possible options that is still being explored. Government CDF's will be available for specific uses but all dredge materials generated by this project will be required to be disposed of as part of the construction contract.

11. What are the confirmed Hazardous Materials (Hazmat) present in the project location?

ANSWER: A Hazardous Material report will be available at the time of award. However, there are contaminated sediments in certain areas of the harbor that contain heavy metals and PCBs and are considered within a CERCLA site footprint.

12. Please provide approximate project duration for:

a. Dry Dock Replacement

b. Waterfront Production Facility

ANSWER: Government is currently targeting a 4 year construction contract duration for the Dry Dock. The scope for the Waterfront Production Facility is not finalized. We do not have an approximate project duration for the Waterfront Production Facility at this time.

13. With the magnitude of the project cost, can the Government provide an indicative amount of Liquidated Damages per day on this project?

ANSWER: Liquidated Damages (LDs) amount is unknown at this time. LDs will be established when the Task Order RFP is issued.

14. Comment regarding with the conceptual drawings, a lot of demotion activities shown on drawing number CD001 to CD101 shall be done prior to the execution of the dry dock replacement. Ideal location of the laydown area as temporary facility should be indicated on the drawings.

ANSWER: Acknowledged. MACC Contractors will have an opportunity to optimize laydown areas, upon the award of the MACC. It is our intention to clearly designate the laydown areas in the Task Order Construction Contract.

15. There will be a reclamation fill to be done near at the revetment/dyke area and construction of Dock 5 as shown on drawing number CN-340 and C-401, will the government provide the method of ground improvement to increase the soil bearing capacity of the reclaimed area?

ANSWER: Method of ground improvement will be clarified as the design progresses. Ground improvement is expected to include stone columns in the reclaimed areas.

16. Will the use of alternative standards such as JIS, BS, DIN equivalent ASTM materials or better quality and of required characteristics be considered for the purpose intended?

ANSWER: MACC Contractors will have an opportunity to discuss alternative standards to be explicitly allowed in the Construction Task Order, upon the award of the MACC. After award of the Construction Task Order, alternatives may be considered through the Value Engineering Change Proposal (VECP) process.

17. Will the government allow to use the steel pile material in-lieu of prestressed concrete pile foundation for capstan, rail foundation and/or storm bollard as shown on drawing number SG- 301 and C-401?

ANSWER: MACC Contractors will have an opportunity to discuss constructability issues that require refinements to the developing design, upon the award of the MACC. After award of the Construction Task Order, variance requests may be considered through the Value Engineering Change Proposal (VECP) process.

18. Will the government require full MEC clearance prior to the civil site works such as excavation for the paving works foundation, retaining walls, building construction and underground utilities?

ANSWER: No landside MEC clearance will be required. Only in-water work is subject to MEC clearance requirements.

19. The government require full MEC clearance during the dredging work. Please provide the methods and procedures for the in-water MEC Clearance.

ANSWER: In-water MEC clearance requirements will be included in the RFP but are not available at this time.

20. Comment regarding with the conceptual drawing on utility layout. The drawings shown a complicated existing underground utility, the government should provide detail layout of underground utilities.

ANSWER: The layout of underground utility drawings will be further clarified as the design progresses. MACC Contractors will have the opportunity to review design submittals upon award of the MACC.

21. How will NAVFAC coordinate the environmental remediation of the P-209 Project with the contractors scope of work to avoid delays in demolition and construction?

ANSWER: Environmental remediation will be part of the construction contractor’s scope. It will be the responsibility of the prime contractor to coordinate activities (including Government activities) to ensure delays are avoided/minimized.

22. Is the government or the contractor responsible for the remediation of soil/sediment, munitions and radioactive materials which historically have been found in most navy shipyards nationwide?

ANSWER: Remediation of materials will be further clarified as the design progresses. MACC Contractors will have the opportunity to review design submittals upon award of the MACC.

23. Which specific buildings will require remediation prior to demolition, is this the responsibility of the offeror?

ANSWER: Remediation of existing facilities will be further clarified as the design progresses.

MACC Contractors will have the opportunity to review design submittals upon award of the

MACC.

24. Which specific buildings will require remediation before renovation, is this the responsibility of the offeror?

ANSWER: Remediation of existing facilities will be further clarified as the design progresses.

MACC Contractors will have the opportunity to review design submittals upon award of the

MACC.

25. Does ICD 705 and the requirement of cleared personnel come into play for any aspect of the construction? If so, please describe the government’s expectation.

ANSWER: ICD 705 is not a requirement for the project at this time. Government's expectation is for the Contractor to comply with the security requirements that will be included in the RFP.

26. The Industry Day slides reference potential scope to include the handling and disposal of CERCLA material. Can NAVFAC please provide more information about this potential scope?

Will the MACC Contractors be responsible for disposal of contaminated materials encountered during execution? Or does NAVFAC have or plan to have a separate set of environmental restoration contractors?

ANSWER: Remediation of materials will be clarified as the design progresses. Disposal of contaminated materials encountered during construction will be part of the construction contractor’s scope.

27. To-date we have been given access to 80 drawings. This RFP is in support of a 35% design package and anticipates that the 60% design package will include 2,200 drawings. Does NAVFAC have a schedule for phased release of additional drawings?

ANSWER: The schedule for the release of the 60% Design Package is detailed in the MACC Seed Task Order scope.

28. Can NAVFAC provide a complete index of design drawings (forecast types, sheets, etc.)?

ANSWER: Release of additional design documents will be forthcoming.

29. Can NAVFAC provide drawings referenced to date as follows; SD 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 301, 401, 410, 420. SG 115 (SH sheets?) SG 100. SG 201, 202, 203. SG 210, 541. SG

031, 115, 120, 140, 521, 530. SG 210, 523, 532.

ANSWER: Release of additional design documents will be forthcoming.

30. Is additional information available with respect to Package A (DBB) and Package B (DB) referenced on drawing G-101?

ANSWER: Release of additional design documents will be forthcoming.

31. Drawing CD001 identifies the demolition of building 233; however, the table on the drawing refers to building 223. Is this a typo?

ANSWER: Correct building number to be demolished is 233. Demo table will be corrected.

32. Drawing CD001 identifies structures PMO-05, PMO-06A, PMO-06B, & PMO-06C. They are not identified in the demolition table, are they to be removed by others?

ANSWER: Those structures shall be demolished by the contractor. Information will be updated in future design documents.

33. The CD series demolition drawings define building(s), infrastructure and utility locations, some general sizes, and basic square footage. Will there be further details provided to include volumes, weights and/or lengths to better quantify total demolition scopes?

ANSWER: Demolition drawings will be further developed as the design progresses.

34. Will the Engineer of Record be providing total quantities of Concrete (tremie), Concrete Cast in Place, Concrete Pre-Cast inclusive of specifications and mix designs?

ANSWER: Specifications for concrete mix design will be provided as the design progresses.

Total quantities of concrete elements will not be provided by the Designer of Record.

35. Will the Engineer of Record be providing total quantities and specification for the Combi Wall King piles and Sheet piles?

ANSWER: Specifications for the Combi Wall King piles and sheet piles will be provided as the design progresses. Total quantities of the pile elements will not be provided by the Designer of Record.

36. Will the Engineer of Record be providing total sizes quantities and specification for the reinforcing rebar (inclusive of #14 rebar ASTM 615 for the DD 5 total design)?

ANSWER: Specification and sizes for the reinforcing rebar will be provided as the design progresses. Total quantities of the reinforcing rebar will not be provided by the Designer of Record.

37. Is it possible to release additional details, specifications, and quantities for the quay walls (East and West)?

ANSWER: Release of additional design documents will be forthcoming.

38. Is it possible to release additional details, specifications, and quantities for the cofferdam alignment at the entrance to the DD? (SQ401)

ANSWER: Release of additional design documents will be forthcoming.

39. Is it possible to release additional details, specifications, and quantities for the retaining walls? (G-101)

ANSWER: Release of additional design documents will be forthcoming.

40. Will an attendee list be provided after the conference today?

ANSWER: The Industry Day attendee list is available for download on sam.gov.

41. Will the slides we are seeing today be provided after the meeting?

ANSWER: The Industry Day presentation is available for download on sam.gov.

42. It is our understanding that a ~$500M A/E IDIQ is being awarded for SIOP. The Moffatt & Nichol team is currently engaged in the formal design for P-209. Will M&N continue with that design, or will it be "turned over" to the new A/E IDIQ for SIOP?

What is the status of the award/contracting for that large A/E SIOP IDIQ?

ANSWER: Moffatt & Nichol will continue with the P-209 design. The Government intends to award the A-E IDIQ.

43. Does the government expect to use contractor support for construction quality assurance?

ANSWER: It is not known at this time.

44. Will the Industry Day presentation slides be made available to attendees?

ANSWER: The Industry Day presentation is available for download on sam.gov.

45. 1) How will NAVFAC coordinate the environmental remediation of soil/sediment, munitions (MEC) and radioactive materials removal which historically have been found in navy shipyards nationwide to avoid delays by the contractors? This challenge has been the case on Guam in two 2020 DoD Inspector General Reports (specifically MEC).

2) Has NAVFAC considered creating a mirror image to the SIOP MACC by creating a Small Business SIOP Environmental Multiple Remedial Action Contract which can be used for PHNSY, PSNSY or even nationwide?

3) Which specific PHNSY buildings will require remediation prior to re-use or demolition, is this "remediation" the responsibility of the offeror or NAVFAC?

4) Does ICD 705 and the requirement of cleared personnel come into play for any aspect of the construction? If so, please describe the government's expectation as the security requirement are mentioned on RFP Page 121

a. For instance, it would seem NAVFAC would require a prime contractor to possess a SECRET or TOP SECRET Clearance, please advise.

5) Will the Pearl Harbor P-209 task order under the MACC be a single contract action or multiple task orders, if multiple please advise high level overview?

6) Will the P-454 task order under the MACC be a single contract action or multiple task orders, if multiple please advise high level overview?

ANSWER: 1) Refer to Q21.

2) No.

3) Still being determined. Construction contractor will be responsible for all building remediation.

4) Refer to Q25.

5) See response to Q1.

6) It is anticipated to be a single task order.

46. One of the earlier slides indicated that the RFP was "Target RFP Issue July 2022." Is that correct? Hasn't the RFP already been issued?

ANSWER: The request for proposal for the MACC was issued on 1 July 2021. It is anticipated that the P-209 task order request for proposal will be issued July 2022.

47. Please advise when the slides being presented will be posted to SAM.Gov? Specifically day/time (or if already posted). Thanks.

ANSWER: The Industry Day presentation is available for download on sam.gov.

48. Will the information included in the slides be sent out to attendees, or made otherwise available?

ANSWER: The Industry Day presentation is available for download on sam.gov.

49. Will the webinar include any information that is specific to the Caisson portion of the Dry Dock #3 Replacement project?

ANSWER: Information specific to the Caisson portion of the Dry Dock #3 Replacement project will be provided in the RFP for the P-209 Task Order.

50. What permits and approvals have been completed and obtained? NEPA/EIS? NHPA Section 106? ESA Section 7? EFH? DA permit? NPDES permits for construction stormwater and dewatering pump station? MS4 permit requirements?

ANSWER: Select permits are currently being pursued by the Government. The permit requirements will be detailed in the P-209 RFP.

51. What specialty studies have been completed or will be government furnished? Biological, hazmat, noise, archaeological/cultural?

ANSWER: It is anticipated that applicable information from the studies will be incorporated into the plans and specifications.

52. What sea level rise elevation must the design comply with?

ANSWER: The site and building elevations are being designed in accordance with UFC 3-201- 01 Civil Engineering.

53. Will all questions asked today in the chat or open forum, along with all related Gov't answers to those questions, be accumulated and documented and then published in the July 23rd stated Gov't response date?

ANSWER: Yes.

54. What level completion of plans (e.g. 35%, 60%, etc.) be included in the RFP?

ANSWER: If design-bid-build, plans will be 100% complete. To be determined if design-build.

55. What are the flows and TDH of the dewatering pumps?

ANSWER: Pump flows and TDH are still being developed and will be provided as the design progresses.

56. Is the bioretention basin as currently shown on the plans the only stormwater quality treatment required for the project?

ANSWER: No, there are other forms of stormwater quality treatment that may be required. The stormwater design is still being developed and additional information will be provided as the design progresses.

57. What is the anticipated water demand for the project?

ANSWER: The utility design is still being developed and additional information will be provided as the design progresses.

58. What is the anticipated wastewater generation for the project?

ANSWER: The utility design is still being developed and additional information will be provided as the design progresses.

59. Will the government furnish a drainage report for the project with delineated drainage basins and runfoff flows?

ANSWER: Any requirements associated with delineated drainage basins will be provided in the RFP for the P-209 Task Order.

60. Are there specific MS4 requirements that must be complied with? If yes, please provide the MS4 requirements.

ANSWER: Yes. Any MS4 requirements will be provided in the in the RFP for the P-209 Task Order.

61. Will the project include any steam, compressed air and "pure water" systems?

ANSWER: The project currently does not include infrastructure for steam or pure water systems. Compressed air infrastructure will be required. However, the utility design is still being developed and additional information will be provided as the design progresses.

62. AE mentioned that some of the unsuitable dredge materials would be disposed of offsite at the PVT Landfill located at one west side of Oahu. It's assumed that the demolition materials would also be disposed of at PVT Landfill. The issue is that PVT Landfill is scheduled to close within the next 2 to 3 years. Is there an alternative on-island disposal site available for unsuitable dredge materials, excavation materials and demolition debris?

ANSWER: Currently under review.