Q and As 1 for IFB RFP FA283522B0002.pdf

FA283522B0002: Repair (Sustain) Central Plant at Hanscom AFB Questions and Answers #1

18 April 2022

1. Question: Paragraph 17.i in the solicitation says that an acronym list shall be provided as an attachment within the Technical Proposal. The acronym list is not mentioned among the items that are excluded from the 20-page limit. Is the list of acronyms included in the page count?

Response: The Acronyms List is not included in the page count.

2. Question: It appears as though Section K (Representations and Certifications) is supposed to be included in Offerors Step Two bids and not as part of their Step One Technical Proposals. Is this correct?

Response: Section K Representations and Certifications are required for Step Two, not as part of Step One. However, Offerors are reminded that IAW Paragraph 1 of FA2835-22- B-0002 - Two Step Method Invitation for Bid (IFB) Request for Technical Proposal (RFP) – Repair (Sustain) Central Plant, Hanscom AFB, MA (MXRD 18-0040) (PZIA-22-0007), this is a 100% Small Business Set-aside in accordance with FAR 19.502-2 and as such Offerors submitting Technical Proposals must be designated as a Small Business under NAICS Code 236220.

3. Question: Paragraph 19 of the solicitation explains that amendments should be acknowledged via email and by signing and returning the front page of each. Should offerors include their signed SF 1442 forms and their signed SF 30 forms (to acknowledge any amendments) as part of the Step One Technical Proposals? If so, are they excluded from the 20-page limit?

Response: Offerors should include their signed SF 1442 forms and their signed SF 30 forms (to acknowledge any amendments) as part of their Step One Technical Proposal.

The signed SF 1442 forms and SF 30 forms are excluded from the 20 page limit.

4. Question: Section M is blank. Is there a Section M included with this solicitation?

Response: There is no content for Section M in this solicitation. See FA2835-22-B-0002 - Two Step Method Invitation for Bid (IFB) Request for Technical Proposal (RFP) – Repair (Sustain) Central Plant, Hanscom AFB, MA (MXRD 18-0040) (PZIA-22-0007) Paragraph 18 for Evaluation Criteria.

5. Question: Until the pricing phase of the proposal (Step Two), it will be extremely difficult for most offerors to identify the “necessary materials and equipment required to successfully complete the project, to include labor quantities, skill mixes, and labor hours.” What minimum level of detail is required to provide an acceptable response to this requirement?

Response: Reference FA2835-22-B-0002 - Two Step Method Invitation for Bid (IFB) Request for Technical Proposal (RFP) – Repair (Sustain) Central Plant, Hanscom AFB, MA (MXRD 18-0040) (PZIA-22-0007), Paragraph 17.

6. Question: During the site visit, we heard that USAF expects that the Step Two (bidding) process would move quickly because it is assumed that offerors will have developed most of their estimate during Step One. The contractors’ perspective is that the pricing/bidding phase for project, due to its size and complexity, will take at least 30 days after the Step Two solicitation files are released. Please clarify USAF’s expectations for the timing and duration for the Step Two procurement process.

Response: The Government expectation is that potential Offerors are developing their Technical Proposal and pricing of that proposed solution simultaneously. The official timeframe for Step 2 bidding will be included in the Step 2 Invitation for Bid.

7. Question: The RFP provides a conceptual level design (Final Concept Design Analysis) and a Basis of Design (BOD) developed by an independent consulting engineering firm and dated 2018 to 2022. Presumably, this design was based upon an engineering study that considered all variables including current and planned infrastructure, disruptions to operating facilities, energy efficiency, environmental impacts and regulations, fuel and electric pricing indexes, resiliency, and durability. It is unclear if the study considered alternative and hybrid heating and cooling systems consistent with modern standards for campus settings. Will USAF consider engineering solutions that are substantially different from the Final Concept Design and BOD including the addition of building-side heating and cooling systems that reduce demand on the central plant?

Response: Offerors should propose their solution in accordance to the stated criteria in the FA2835-22-B-0002 - Two Step Method Invitation for Bid (IFB) Request for Technical Proposal (RFP) – Repair (Sustain) Central Plant, Hanscom AFB, MA (MXRD 18-0040) (PZIA-22-0007) requirement documents.

8. Question: To develop alternative approaches that provide best-value to the government, we request additional time to develop a technical approach in the Step One phase.

Response: Technical proposals are due on the day and time stated in the FA2835-22-B- 0002 - Two Step Method Invitation for Bid (IFB) Request for Technical Proposal (RFP) – Repair (Sustain) Central Plant, Hanscom AFB, MA (MXRD 18-0040) (PZIA-22-0007).

9. Question: Would USAF consider conducting another Step One site visit to allow more participation by trade subcontractors? Subcontractor involvement is essential for the technical approach development and for the labor estimate

Response: No additional Step One Site Visits will be considered at this time.

10. Question: Please consider revising the instructions or Factor 1 to permit offerors to provide a Gantt chart schedule that is excluded from the 20 counted pages.

Response: The schedule is excluded from the 20 counted pages.

11. Question: Please confirm the intended size and number of new generator(s). The concept drawings indicate either one 1.25 MW generator or one 600 kW generator with provisions for two future 600 kW generators.

Response: One (1) 600 kW generator as stated in the Final Concept Design Analysis, page 25, Basis of Design Section D5082-2.

12. Question: Does the scope of work include a power systems study, including labeling of electrical equipment for arc flash hazards?

Response: Yes, a Power Study is required as indicated in UFC 3-501-01 Section 3-2.2 and UFGS Section 26 28 01.00 10. Also see UFC 3-501-01 Section 2-1.12 regarding arc flash labeling requirements.

13. Question: Please confirm that the new generators will be powered with diesel fuel.

Response: See Final Concept Design Analysis, page 25, Basis of Design Section D5082-2.

The generator will be powered by diesel.

14. Question: Are additional complete and accurate as-built MEP drawings available including:

a. Flow Diagrams

b. Equipment Schedules

c. Details

d. Plan Drawings (piping, ductwork, controls, etc.)

Response: The Government does not confirm the completeness or accuracy of the as-built or record drawings, however those drawings that are available will be provided as part of the Step Two IFB process.

15. Question: Are complete and accurate as-built structural framing and foundation drawings available (plans, sections, details)?

Response: The Government does not confirm the completeness or accuracy of the as-built or record drawings, however those drawings that are available will be provided as part of the Step Two IFB process.

16. Question: Are complete and accurate foundation drawings for the exhaust stacks available (plans, sections, details)?

Response: The Government does not confirm the completeness or accuracy of the as-built or record drawings, however those drawings that are available will be provided as part of the Step Two IFB process.

17. Question: Are structural calculations and design criteria for the exhaust stack assembly’s available (foundations, building connections, wind, seismic)?

Response: The Government does not confirm the completeness or accuracy of the as-built or record drawings, however those drawings that are available will be provided as part of the Step Two IFB process.

18. Question: Is the Designer of Record (DOR) responsible for completing a structural integrity assessment of the exhaust stacks (2)?

Response: Reference the Hanscom AFB Design Guide, Section 5.4.10. As part of the design process, the A/E shall provide Civil/Structural Documentation/data.

19. Question: The Stack Investigation Reports (2) provided in Attachment 01 were completed 5-years ago (August 2017) and they identify several recommendations including the completion of recurring engineering inspections every 3-years. Have any additional inspections been completed since 2017?

Response: No.

20. Question: The Stack Investigation Reports (2) provided in Attachment 01 identify several recommended repairs. Have any of the repairs been completed?

Response: No.

21. Question: Has there been testing done on the existing Boiler 1 internal refractory, for hazardous materials (such as asbestos)?

Response: No.

22. Question: Is there an existing operational and fully functioning Refrigerant Monitoring system?

Response: Yes.

23. Question: The proposed design indicates that the existing cooling towers are to be raised a total elevation of 6 feet. Has that height been validated to resolve any pump operation concerns?

Response: Refer to the Final Concept Design Analysis page 15, Basis of Design Section D3026 – “Cooling Tower Height Increase” that presents calculations supporting the height increase.

24. Should we consider that the existing fuel oil tank will be emptied and flushed by the Government prior to its conversion to No. 2 fuel oil?

Response: Reference the Final Concept Design Analysis page 12-13, Basis of Design Section D2099. The Government will burn off as much of the fuel as possible. We estimate there will be about 40,000 gallons of #6 oil left in each tank. Contractor will be responsible for emptying and cleaning out the residual.

25. Question: Should the new size / load profile of Boiler No. 1 be modeled after the Natural Gas Usage, shown in Appendix F, (Page 262 of 452), that is, a trim boiler for seasonal heating operation less than 10% of total steam production?

Response: Reference the Final Concept Design Analysis page 14, Section D3021.