3_-Amendment_3_FOVA_Questions_3-16-15.pdf

FOVA Rehabilitation - Questions as of March 16, 2015

1. Note 3 on page D2 (7 of 55 on Utility set) notes ‘no digging allowed within burial site boundary’. There are also notes (i.e. Note 1 page C28 – 37 of 55 typical) that state ‘All excavations in burial site boundary to be hand dug’. These two notes generate some confusion – is digging allowed and only by hand?

Answer: This is a general note, and specifics are indicated for each building. For utilities servicing building P722 and P721, no digging is allowed and utilities are to be laid on grade and fill placed on top.

For utilities serving building P987, hand digging is required with an NPS archaeological monitor present.

Refer to Drawing C28 for hand digging. Asphalt and gravel road base may be removed with heavy equipment with an NPS archaeological monitor present.

2. Are all utilities within Mclellan Road that lie within the burial boundary to be hand dug?

Answer: Utilities serving Building 987 that are within the burial site boundary are to be hand dug. (These include shallow services to the building itself). Other utilities in McClellan Road starting at the boundary between building P987 and P989 (outside of the burial site boundary) can be installed with normal construction methods. Asphalt and gravel road base may be removed with heavy equipment with an NPS archaeological monitor present.

3. Is Scarifying of the existing ground surface as required under the contract to be performed as hand dug or is that activity not considered excavation and can be machine performed?

Answer: It can be machine performed, however an NPS Archeologist will observe. In general, removal of existing asphalt or concrete sidewalk, or scarifying or stripping of vegetation of the surface (assume a maximum of 6-inches) is allowed. No scarification allowed in the cemetery.

4. None of these notes are reflected on the Bldg 987 drawings which has extensive excavations for utilities, refrigerant lines, irrigation at turf, plumbing, electrical power, electrical comm. If this work is to be all performed by hand – the bldg. 987 drawings should reflect that requirement on plan notes in order to avoid confusion between the utility drawings and bldg. 987 drawings. Burial site is noted on page G3 (3 of 5) and encompasses building 987.

Answer: Utilities serving Building 987 that are within the burial site boundary are to be hand dug. (These include shallow services to the building itself). An NPS archaeological shall monitor.

5. Are there any restrictions on the allowance, or the size, of earthwork equipment within the designated burial area? Having worked around cemeteries in the past, typically ground disturbance is not allowed or highly discouraged in areas of rest. There is scarfing, import, grading, compaction and excavation required under the contract – is this all expected to be hand-performed or will equipment be allowed?

Answer: In general the answer is no. Equipment will be allowed for all activities mentioned with the exception of excavation. It is the intention that shallow hand excavation will be required for utilities servicing building P987. Utilities serving P721 and P722 are to be laid on grade and fill placed on top.

Equipment will be allowed to perform work but will be observed by NPS Archeologists.

6. Sheet C34 (43 of 55) of the Utility set shows photo of existing access panel and existing opening in stone wall along the North wall of Bldg P721. There is no indication of the quantity of these locations as the site plan shows a single note. There are 8 existing openings of the stone wall (photo 2) and 1 existing access panel (photo 1). The plans should be corrected to note the number of actual locations (note 3 on page C33).

Answer: See Sheet C34 Specifications Note 1 for window well quantities. Note 1 calls for 9 window wells for the stone openings and 1 additional window well with specific dimensions for the access panel.

7. Page 8.01 of the Bldg 987 drawings (page 57 of 151) appears to be missing important details in the reconstruction of the porch guardrail. The plans indicate a cable system is to be installed but provides no detail on how the cable is terminated or tightened (i.e. turnbuckle or eyebolt?). There are no details for the support of the added vertical flatbar at the end – and if this flatbar is to be welded into the existing guardrail the railing will need to be abated from the lead paint.

Answer: Cable fittings are specified in 055213, item 2.3. The flat bar is to be welded to the existing guardrail.

Also – is the existing vertical pipe rails to be field modified (drilled) 4” O.C. to allow the cable to pass thru? This is all intensive work that should be reflected on the drawings.

Answer: Yes, the vertical pipe rail is to be field modified to allow the cable to pass through.

8. Buildings 989 and 993 have note 14 which calls to prep, prime and paint the (4) large roof ventilators. Building 987 has these same ventilators (picture attached) but are not currently noted as having additional work performed. I believe note 14 should be added to the building elevations and/or roof plan on bldg. 987 as well.

Answer: General note 4 on page A3.01 states that entire building envelope excluding stone is to be painted. Further, 099113 – Exterior Painting, item 1.2 B, states that all exposed surfaces that are not to remain natural are to be painted. This would apply to the ventilators, which are to be painted.

9. Annual Tower inspections – How does the NPS want this bid? Just the price for an annual inspection, or for a 5 year, or 10 year?

Answer: Any inspections required only pertain to the construction of the tower. Inspections after contract completion are not part of this solicitation.

10. Bid documents call for the tower to have a solid core, or angle iron leg. Can this be changed to allow for tubular legs? This will save on costs and still has to meet all engineering standards.

To be answered next week.

11. Antennas and cable. We need tower heights identified, and cable types for new and future installations to make sure the tower is properly engineered.

Answer: Per Section 338113 – Radio Tower, item 2.2 B.1: The radio tower is to be 100 feet tall. Future installations will be answered next week.

12. Can we verify who is installing antennas and cables? From the Bid documents, it appears the NPS is wanting us to provide the tower mounts and installing them as well… please verify.

To be answered next week.

13. Building 404 drawing sheet E7.06 #2 Ground Well Detail does not comply with Motorola R-56 installation standards for grounding. This picture shows the correct installation of the inspection well/ground rod.

Answer: The main difference appears to be the depth of the ground rod at the test well. We have no objections to the test well being constructed per the detail below.

14. Building 404 drawings sheet E7.01 #4 Ufer Ground Electrode – Ufer ground can be installed but is not recommended. Ufer ground was designed for dry, desert climates that did not support grounding, so the ground was tied into the rebar of foundations, that included extra rebar. If the system takes a lightning strike, it can fracture the concrete.

Answer: 4.4.1.5 of the Motorola standard states “Though concrete-encased electrodes (also known as Ufer electrodes, named after Herbert G. Ufer, or foundation earth electrodes) are not required by this standard, they should be used in new construction as a method of supplementing the grounding (earthing) electrode system…”. Please include the Ufer ground as indicated on the construction documents.

15. There are quite a few things on the grounding side that are above/beyond the R-56 standards. Just to verify that they want to go by the drawings. For instance, using the #3/0 tinned is not a standard, it is usually #2 tinned. Ground Rods are 10’ and 5/8” diameter. Ufer is not normally used in this region. We can do a chemical ground rods to compensate.

Answer: The Motorola standard gives minimum requirements. Exceeding those minimum standards is allowed. The comment below indicates there is a good chance the system will not test out to 10 ohms.

Reducing the conductors from #3/0 to #2 will only aggravate the concerns below. Similarly reducing the ¾” dia x 10’ ground rods to the Motorola minimum of 5/8” dia x 8’ ground rods will also aggravate the concerns below. We are calling out for chemical ground rods where they would be covered by asphalt or concrete. Where the drawings exceed the Motorola standards, please install as indicated by the drawings.

16. The grounding system will be installed per the bid document design and will be tested as required. However, there is a very good chance that 10 ohms grounding can never be reached. We have done a lot of this work, and run into this over and over, even with ODOT. You could spend another $100k trying to reach the 10 ohms, and never get there.

Answer: This issue should be addressed an RFI during construction

17. Note 4 on A3.03 (page 37 of 151) calls out to provide wood lattices typ of (12).

A. There is no detail or photograph of these lattices in the documents. I’ve attached a photo so that bidders that have not visited the site or noted these lattices could have an idea of the material, dimension and quality of the existing lattices.

B. There are (14) existing lattices and existing openings – not 12 – along the North Porch. Not sure what is intended below the porch at the East elevation – nothing is noted on the plans.

Answer: Lattice is required on the north, east, and west sides of the north porch. Lattice is not required under the small porch on the east elevation.

Phase 1 Utility

18. C3 of the Phase 1 utility drawings (12 of 55) denotes ‘native backfill’ in the utility trench sections. We believe this should be classified as ‘import backfill’ as the project is not generating any native material.

Answer: Yes. This should be import backfill, as native quantities are not likely sufficient.

19. Room finish schedule calls for the new ceramic tile in restrooms 105 & 106 base in building 404 to ‘match existing’. We’ll either need access to review the existing base, a picture of the existing base provided by the NPS, or the actual base type and size so that our tile contractor can accurately price out the project.

Answer: Photo above shows the existing tile in building 404 restrooms. It is a 1 x 1 porcelain ceramic tile.

20. NPS to answer with input from ARG Typically the asbestos survey will include not only results of samples, it normally also provides quantities which provide a basis for an accurate asbestos abatement quote. There is a note near the bottom of page 4 of the ‘Good Faith Asbestos and Lead Inspection’ that says ‘Quantities were not performed due to time constraints’ followed by a comment for the abatement company to field verify quantities. Not only is this report not complete (locked rooms denied access), it also doesn’t provide any indication that the vertical runs of the boiler piping were tested (those runs behind chase walls). Seems that this report as written opens the abatement up to a large risk of cost increases due to the absence of quantities and areas suspected of survey oversight.

It seems at this point that the reasonable thing to do is for the NPS to revise the bid form to include estimated units and a unit-cost approach for the asbestos abatement for the different catagories of abatement types – along with opening up the building for a second site visit so that abatement firms will have the opportunity to estimate quantities to develop a competitive and fair bid strategy. Monica.

Please verify that the final full, subsequent report from White Shield is in the government furnished documents available to the contractors. Ric and I paid for a follow up report that has quantities and needs to be provided to them. Please confirm

This will be answered next week

21. Section 99113 Exterior Painting section 3.3 notes a Lead Based Paint Treatment plan to be submitted with the offer. There is no mention of this in either section L or award criteria section M.

This will be answered next week

22. Reflected ceiling plan note 9 on pages A6.00 thru A6.03 calls for ‘dropped gyp bd clg’. There are no wall sections, building sections, or details that show what supports this dropped gyp board ceiling. I would assume its section 092216 – non-structural metal framing but the lack of details or callout in the drawings makes that an assumption – it could very easily be assumed to be wood framing. In either case, the lack of details on the drawings opens up a potential argument and scope omission between the interiors contractor who would normally cover the metal framing but could assume it to be wood – versus the wood framing contractor who would assume it to be metal framing.

A section thru these rooms detailing the support system would be prudent.

Answer: The drawings clearly indicate the ceiling is to be dropped, and as mentioned above this can be accomplished in different ways, both of which are appropriate. This becomes a means and methods issue for the general contractor to resolve and bid accordingly.

23. Notes on page E0.02 of the Site Plan Electrical Building 404 (page 56 of 83) notes two separate places where power and communications are ‘furnished under separate utility project’. These tie-in’s are shown under the utility drawings page E6 (page 50 of 55) and while they are on a separate set of drawings, the note could create some confusion as it isn’t a ‘separate utility project’ as this is all one contract / all one project. Perhaps a more accurate note would be to ‘reference utility drawings for power and communication tie-ins’.

This will be answered next week