The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
| VGLZ 202001, PROJECT TITLE Demo B972 and Sitework | SELFRIDGE ANGB, MI |
| RFIs COA 9/1/2020 | Prepared by: A. Vermeersch |
| 1 |
| What is the depth of the asphalt pavement and subbase to be removed? (this is requested to quantify the cu. yds. to be removed, and the amount of backfill required to restore the grade). |
| Visual survey of asphalt leads us to assume that asphalt cap is no ticker than 4” and that the subbase is not thicker than 4” where it exists. |
| 2 |
| Is the asphalt pavement and base contaminated? If so with what? The landfills will require a profile? |
| No known asphalt contamination has been identified at B972 pavement areas. Asphalt pavements should be recycled and AF Form 72 must be completed for any materials being removed off-site from within installation boundaries. |
| 3 |
| The solicitation states that the railroad "ballast" is contaminated. Please provide a contamination profile. How deep is the ballast to quantify the removal, disposal and backfill required? |
| Analytical results from soils beneath railroad ballast can be provided from other railroad locations. Ballast materials have not been sampled but gross contamination (oil staining, grease, etc.) have been visually observed. Proper characterization (analytical sampling) of ballast materials, containerization, and disposal at a IRP site 6 - NW Landfill would be required. Railroad ballast depth unknown. |
| 4 |
| Is there a "burrow pit" available onsite to provide backfill material as may be required to restore the elevations of the foundations, parking lots and ballast removal before topsoil can be placed? |
| Contractor shall bring clean fill onto Selfridge for any backfill materials, as base sources may not be available during contractor activities. All fill shall be IAW with SOW and letter of cleanliness from burrow source should be submitted for approval to engineer. |
Refer to 31 20 00 para 2.2 for characteristics of the fill material
| 5 |
| To what grade elevation depth is the railroad "ballast" to be removed? SOW states 6" below "adjacent" grade. Is the intent to remove the entire mound...and leave it level with the adjacent grade? |
| The intent is to remove the entire mound in so that it is level with the adjacent ground, has top cover, and adequate drainage consistent with the surrounding context. |
| 6 |
| To what grade elevation height is the backfill, topsoil to achieve? The design of the grading and drainage plan is required to quantify these items of work! |
| Backfill, grading and drainage shall be such that water travers the site to the existing water management features. Refer to drainage intent drawings for additional information. |
| 7 |
| The intent of the topographic survey, Soil Erosion, grading and drainage plan is not explained in the solicitation. Where is the "runoff" to drain to? No specific culverts, swales, drainage structures are mentioned or required in this solicitation. |
| Intent is to provide positive drainage from all stabilized soil disturbed areas, prevent any negative surface water drainage impacts to adjacent properties/buildings, and prevent any surface ponding during surface water sheet flow activities by connecting into or using existing stormwater conveyances. Contractor’s design to ensure positive drainage occurs. Soil erosion plan shall incorporate existing topographic elevations and proposed elevations for positive drainage at all locations. Grading plan is incorporated into SESC drawings required by MCPWO SESC ordinance. |
| 8 |
| The solicitation requires us to remove existing drainage structures (i.e.catch basins), should this requirement be based on the final grading and drainage plan to quantify these work items? |
| The removal of the catch basins and sewers has been de-scoped. Final grading plan shall incorporate positive drainage (applicable slopes constructed/graded) and prevent any surface ponding at site project locations and/or adjacent properties. The existing SW catch basins can be utilized to manage the water on site. Refer to drainage intent drawings for additional information. |
| 9 |
| Is there a Hazardous Material Survey available for Building 972 and 891? |
| B891 is not a part of this SOW. The reference to the building at 14.5.1 has been removed in Addendum 1 |
B/972 – Attachment are the lead-based paint and asbestos surveys conducted by the Army in 2003 and 2005, respectively. Both indicate no presence of the hazmat sampled. Refer to B972 Hazmat Survey for additional information.
| 10 |
| Will the contents of the building be removed prior to award of this solicitation, or will the contractor be responsible to remove the contents? |
The contents of the building shall be removed by the building occupants. Items remaining in the building following their departure and approval shall be removed by the contractor.
| 11 |
| Are concrete slabs to be removed with the subbase, or can the subbase remain? |
Subbase is to be removed with the slab.
| 12 |
| As straw mulch is an approved method of restoration by the Macomb County Soil Erosion Commission, can this be used in lieu of straw matting? |
| Yes. Straw matting is preferred over straw mulch as being more wind resistant when properly secured (not a FOD hazard), provides better seed coverage from birds, and site restoration occurs faster with mulch matting over grass seed. |
| 13 |
| What percentage of completion will be withheld until the County approves the restoration and releases the Soil Erosion permit next Spring? |
| 5% |
| 14 |
| Is the line of numerous cedar trees between the two large parking lots to be removed? This is insinuated per SOW item 4.6 |
| Yes. Refer to drawing A-002 Demo plan - B 972 for specifies which trees, light poles, flagpoles, and other site features are to be removed. |
| 15 |
| The SOW 1.0 states "1.1 This SOW provides for selective upgrades and repair of exterior lights systems and electrical power systems components and includes, but is not limited to: " |
Please explain what this pertains to?
This portion of the SOW was removed in Addendum 1
| 16 |
| Period of Performance, 1442 states 90 days, SOW item 21. states 120 days? While in reality the Period of Performance is unrealistic due to the weather restraints and the ability to restore and stabilize the site due to the late fall award. Request Soil Erosion and Grading and Drainage plan be limited to 120 days and total completion to 270 days? |
| Weather restraints will be handled during the contract administration process via a winter weather hold. |
| 17 |
| Please provide Wetland Boundaries as described in SOW item 10.1.3.2 |
| See attachment. Wetlands near RRT removal. None near B972. |
| 18 |
| SOW item 10.1.5.1 states " The Government will develop the site-specific soil erosion plans and submit them to Macomb County Soil erosion office for approval. Once approval is obtained, the Contractor will be required to obtain the soil erosion permit and incur costs of applicable state and local permits necessary to start work activities." Is this correct? |
| Incorrect. Contractor’s responsibility to develop soil erosion plan, provide electronic and hardcopies of plans per SANGB and MCPWO requests for review, pay for permit fees, and all maintenance of temporary soil erosion and sediment control measures until site stabilization and permit closed by MCPWO. Contractor is required to coordinate with 127 CES/CEV office for plan review prior to submittal for MCPWO review. Corrections based on 127 CES/CEV and MCPWO must be implemented. MCPWO Soil Erosion office will not accept draft plans from projects at Selfridge until 127 CES/CEV has reviewed and informed county. See 2017 SANGB Specs for proper process/steps of contractor SESC plan generation. |
| 19 |
| Please provide LIDAR data for contours per SOW item 10.1.3.4. |
| We can provide this information upon award. |
| 20 |
| Other Hazardous Waste as described in SOW 14,5.1 " Major, known hazardous materials/wastes have been defined where possible. The Contractor will be required to remove an underground Oil/Water Separator (OWS), located at the N/E corner of Bldg. 891, as part of the this Demolition Contract." |
As this item was not addressed on the plans or walk-thru, would you please arrange another site visit to address this item?
Bldg 891 Is not part of the SOW. This paragraph has been removed in Addendum 1.
| 21 |
| Will there be drawings 2-5 issued for the new work? |
| Addendum 1 includes 5 Drawings. |
A-001 Site Plan A-002 Demo Plan – B972 A-003 Drainage Intent Plan – B972 A-004 Demo Plan – Railroad A-005 Drainage Intent Plan – Railroad
| 22 |
| Can the Guard provide the rail weight or a photo of the rail identification stamp showing this information? |
| See Rail road markings, attached. Rail appears to be ARA 9020. |
| 23 |
| Who is completing the testing for possible contamination of the ballasts? |
| Contractor’s responsibility. |
| 24 |
| Is there a location onsite that contaminated material can be disposed of? |
| Further coordination with state would be required to occur to potentially determine another location for contaminated soils/RR ballast (IRP Site 6 – Northwest Landfill) |
| 25 |
| Is the electrical transformer deemed hazardous? |
A survey of the transformer was conducted and there was a sticker inside stating that there were no PCBs in the transformer at the time of manufacture. Based on the age of the facility and labeling on the transformer, the presence of PCBs is not anticipated. The only way to be 100% sure would be to test it. If there is PCB oil in the electrical transformer, it is hazardous. The contractor shall take precaution for handling electrical transformer.
Also, the contractor shall follow all safety lock out and tag out OHSA procedures for handling electrical transformer.
| 26 |
| Can you tell us what is in the building that we could not have access to? Is it possible to get pictures? |
| The building that was inaccessible during the site visit was B/972. See attached B972 Secure interior photos. |
| Do you know if the transformer that has to be removed has been tested and cleared of pcb's? |
| Transformer not removed. A survey of the transformer was conducted and there was a sticker inside stating that there were no PCBs in the transformer at the time of manufacture. Based on the age of the facility and labeling on the transformer, the presence of PCBs is not anticipated. |
| 28 |
| What is the depth of the batch basin? |
| Refer to Addendum 1 drawings for catch basin depths. Demolition of the catch basins has been de-scoped. Contractor shall incorporate catch basins into grading and drainage plan for the site restoration. |
| 29 |
| Where is the location of the borrow pit and can this material be utilized for back fill for the building or is class II sand required? |
| Contractor shall bring clean fill onto Selfridge for any backfill materials, as base sources may not be available during contractor activities. All fill shall be IAW with SOW and letter of cleanliness from burrow source should be submitted for approval to engineer. |
Refer to 31 20 00 para 2.2
| 30 |
| What insurances are required for all areas of this contract to be completed? |
| A. Please refer to Section 01000 Division 01 General Requirements (pages 45 & 46) on the solicitation for insurance minimum requirements. FAR Clause 52.228-5 has also been included in the Contract Clauses section |
| 31 |
| The solicitation states in Section 6.2 that the bid opening will occur at the time and date specified in Block 13 of the SF1442, 31st August 2020 at 2:00PM ET. How long with the bid opening last? Are bids due before 2:00PM or is there a timeframe after 2:00PM that the bid opening occurs where bids may be submitted during? |
A. Please see Section 00100 Paragraph 6 (page 10) on the solicitation for bid repository and bid opening instructions. Specific guidance is also included there in regards to the handling of “late” bids, should such an incident occur. Bottom line is that there is almost no chance that a “late” bid will be accepted. Length of time for a bid opening is completely dependent on how many bids are received.
| 32 |
| On page 5 of the solicitation, the note states that an original bid bond and original power of attorney is required with the submission of the bid. This is contradictory of page 1, box 12A&B that state the contractor must furnish any required performance and payment bonds 10 calendar days after the award. Can you please confirm when the bid bond is due? |
| A. The bid bond is due on the date as stated on the SF1442 block 13. The bid bond must be on a SF24 form. Performance and Payment Bonds are not due until 10 calendar days after contract award. |
| In regard to the Power of Attorney that is required with the submission of the bid, can you elaborate on the necessity of the Power of Attorney and what it is for? |
| A. The bond surety executes a power of attorney document authorizing the agent to issue bonds in the name of the surety. It protects the government in the event the contractor refuses, or is unable to honor its bid and accept an award of a contract. |
| 34 |
| Can you confirm that the required Bid Bond form SF24 is labelled OMB Control Number: 9000-0045? We would like to know if this is the current version being used. |
| A. Yes that is the current SF24 being used. |
| 35 |
| On page 14 of the solicitation in 52.228-1, section b, it states that an irrevocable letter of credit is acceptable as a form of a bid guarantee. Can you please confirm if proof of a line of credit in the amount of 20 percent of the bid price is acceptable in replacement of a bid bond? If so, is the SF24 form still required along with proof of line of credit from a financial institution? |
| A. Bid Bonds and original Power of Attorney are required for all IFBs. |
| 36 |
| The solicitation states that this is an IFB sealed bid. We understand that you will be going with the lowest bid without review of a technical proposal. Is this correct? |
| A. Award will be made to the responsible bidder whose bid conforms to this invitation for bid and is most advantageous to the Government considering only price and price related factors. Please also see Section 00100 Paragraph 11 (page 11) for further guidance in regards to determining responsibility with the apparent low bidder. |
| 37 |
| Will an asbestos survey of building 972 be completed by the government and furnished to prospective bidders? If so, will quantities be provided? This is necessary to properly bid this project. |
| B/972 - Attached are the lead-based paint and asbestos surveys conducted by the Army in 2003 and 2005, respectively. Both indicate no presence of the hazmat sampled. See attached B972 Hazmat Survey. |
| 38 |
| Who will be providing the utility disconnects prior to starting the job? |
| Electrical disconnects can be coordinated with the 127 CES Electrical Shop. |
| 39 |
| Given the fact that Miss Dig does not enter the base, will the government be providing ground markings to indicate underground utilities? |
| Miss dig can come out to base as long as their arrival is coordinated with CE and they are escorted or they have been properly vetted onto the installation. USIG and URG are both used to survey different utilities. |
| 40 |
| Is the asphalt going to remain on the base? |
| Milled asphalt can remain on site. Placement shall be coordinated with the roads and grounds shop. |
| 41 |
| What would be the grade plans on the demolition site for drainage? |
| Contractor’s responsibility to develop soil erosion plan, provide electronic and hardcopies of plans per SANGB and MCPWO requests for review, pay for permit fees, and all maintenance of temporary soil erosion and sediment control measures until site stabilization and permit closed by MCPWO. Contractor is required to coordinate with 127 CES/CEV office for plan review prior to submittal for MCPWO review. Corrections based on 127 CES/CEV and MCPWO must be implemented. MCPWO Soil Erosion office will not accept draft plans from projects at Selfridge until 127 CES/CEV has reviewed and informed county. See 2017 SANGB Specs for proper process/steps of contractor SESC plan generation. |
Existing catch basins shall be utilized within the grading plan to capture storm water.
| 42 |
| Will the bollards remain on site regarding the train track removal? |
| Any bollard would need to be properly disposed of off site. |
| 43 |
| Will the base stone from the railway removal remain on site? |
| Yes. Base stone is to be removed to the IRP site 6 - NW Landfill which is located on base. |
| 44 |
| If the soil is outsourced what are the requirements? |
| Contractor shall bring clean fill onto Selfridge for any backfill materials, as base sources may not be available during contractor activities. All fill shall be IAW with SOW and letter of cleanliness from burrow source should be submitted for approval to engineer. |
Refer to 31 20 00 para 2.2 for soil characteristics.
