Amend 06 W91151-20-B-0002 FHTX 25 JUNE 20.pdf

0011448273 AD001976P

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The pupose of this Amendment is to provide response to Request for Information.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 6

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 24-Jun-2020

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W9115120B0002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-Mar-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

23-Jun-2020

CODE

MICC - FORT HOOD

36000 DARNALL LOOP, ROOM 1300B

FORT HOOD TX 76544-5025

W91151 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

June 1, 2020

W9115120B0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The following have been modified:

RESPONSE TO INDUSTRY

W91151-20-B-0002 Clear Creek & Old Ironside Traffic Light _ RFIs

As of 23 June 2020

RESPONSES TO INDUSTRY QUESTIONS:

In the specifications 32 01 13.00 20 2.1 Emulsified Asphalt Seal Coat Application

1. This is a process that our local asphalt guys don't perform. This is a very expensive process. Would it be agreeable with the Government to use a typical slurry seal coat instead of this process?

THE DRAWINGS CALL FOR SLURRY SEAL, NOT SEAL COAT. REFER TO “EMULISIFIED

ASPHALT SLURRY SEAL SURFACE TREATMENT (TYPE II)” SPECIFICATION PROVIDED IN

SECTION 2 OF TECHNICAL EXHIBIT “C” DATED JUNE 1, 2020 FOR SLURRY SEAL

REQUIREMENTS.

RESPONSES TO INDUSTRY QUESTIONS:

1. What do you want at Old Ironsides? No Pole was called out, No Signal shown. Is this a glorified flashing beacon? Please advise what you are wanting us to quote.

REFER TO SHEET CS‐111A IN REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020.

2. Completion Time shows 120 Calendar days. Procurement of Poles takes 4‐5 months. Will more time be provided?

COMPLETION TIME REVISED TO 300 DAYS.

3. On Sheet CD101 it shows the only elimination is 3 crosswalks and the little bit of 4" double yellow on S. 78th Street (between Hells on Wheels & Old Ironsides). The existing right turn lane arrows on H.O.W. will be changed to combination arrows. Will the existing turn arrow need to be eliminated prior to placing the combination arrow?

ALL THERMOPLASTIC MARKINGS AND OR STRIPING WILL NEED TO BE

ELIMINATED (REMOVED) FROM THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS. DO NOT GRIND.

ADDED TO SCOPE:

SLURRY SEAL ALL PAVEMENT WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS DEPICTED ON CS‐101

ACCORDING TO GENERAL NOTE #10 ON G‐201 OF REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE

2020. REFER TO CS‐101 FOR PROPOSED MARKING/STRIPING PLACEMENT. ALL STRIPING

AND MARKING SHALL BE THERMOPLASTIC. SEE SPECIFICATIONS.

4. On Sheet CD101 it shows the only elimination is 3 crosswalks and the little bit of 4" double yellow on S. 78th Street (between Hells on Wheels & Old Ironsides). Once the new crosswalk and stop bar on placed at the intersection on H.O.W. & Clear Creek, will the existing words and arrows be the correct distance back from the stop bar? Will these need to be eliminated and moved?

SEE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO RFI #3.

5. On Sheet CD101 it shows the only elimination is 3 crosswalks and the little bit of 4" double yellow on S. 78th Street (between Hells on Wheels & Old Ironsides).Is all the striping on Clear Creek to be either retracing existing stripe or new stripe with no elimination required?

SEE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO RFI #3.

6. On Sheet CS111‐ Key Note 16 it calls for RRFB‐ Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon. I do not find this call out anywhere on this sheet; please advise if this in error and should be ignored or provide the location of the RRFB(s)?

REFER TO REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020. RRFB IS NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN THIS

PROJECT.

7. Is Dominion Power supplying the power to the light? Where does the power come from?

YES. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT DOMINION FOR QUOTE AND INCLUDE IN BID TO

GOVERNMENT.

8. What will the cost be from Dominion be if they are supplying the power?

SEE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO RFI #7.

9. Sheet CS 110 A‐ Poles 1A and 1B do Not exist because there are no 50‐55 combination as called out in TXDOT world. Please see Txdot Approved Poles. We cannot price something that does not exist. Please advise what you are wanting us to quote.

REFER TO TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE NOTES ON SHEET CS‐101 IN REVISON 2 DRAWINGS

DATED JUNE 2020. WHERE STANDARD POLES AND ASSEMBLIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE,

PROVIDE CUSTOM POLES AND ASSEMBLIES. CUSTOM POLE AND ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE

DESIGNED WITH THE AASHTO LTS DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS USING TXDOT CRITERIA.

10. Standard sheet LMA(5)‐12 shows the longest Clamp on arm to be 44 feet

Also ‐ ILSN street name signs or shown, therefore poles should be shown as ILSN type.Is this the Government's Intention?

SEE REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020. ILSN STREETNAME SIGNS ARE NOT TO BE

INCLUDED IN THIS PROJECT. PROVIDE CONVENTIONAL SIGNS PER CS‐110A AND CS‐111A.

11. Old Ironsides shows poles but no callout on the Type of lengths of arms. What is the length and type?

REFER TO SHEET C‐111A IN REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020.

12. Also, Old Ironsides shows No Signal Heads shown. Is this correct?

13. Any Peds on Old Ironside? Is this correct?

14. Any Ped Ple Assemblies on Old Ironsides? Is this correct?

15. Both Ironsides and Hells on Wheels, have no Cabling callout. Is this correct?

REFER TO REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020.

16. Both Ironsides and Hells on Wheels, No Electric Service call out. Is this correct?

17. Both Ironsides and Hells on Wheels, No conduit descriptions ‐ Size, number, Bore or trench. Is this correct?

REFER TO REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020. BORE WHEN CROSSING THE ROAD.

18. Both Ironsides and Hells on Wheels, No Ground Boxes shown. Is this correct?

REFER TO REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020.

19. Both Ironsides and Hells on Wheels, No Electric service. Is this correct?

20. Both Ironsides and Hells on Wheels, No Controller foundation shown. Is this correct?

REFER TO SHEET CS‐557 IN REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020.

21. General Note 5 on sheet CS 111 is misleading. Are Peds APS or standard?

THERE IS NO GENERAL NOTE 5 ON CS111 THAT REFERS TO ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL

(APS). HOWEVER, IT IS THE GOVERNMENT’S INTENTION TO HAVE AUDIBLE PED SIGNALS.

GENERAL NOTE 5 ON SHEET CS111 REFERS TO THE VIDEO DETECTION EQUIPMENT FOR THE

TRAFFIC SIGNALS.

22. Gen Note 5 on sheet CD 101 refers to existing Signal to be removed. Is there an existing Signal?

GENERAL NOTE 5 ON SHEET CD101 REFERS TO CONTRACTOR PROVIDING TRAFFIC CONTROL

DURING THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT

GENERAL NOTE 6 REFERS TO ANY SIGNAL POLES, MAST ARMS, SIGNALS, EQUIPTMENT, ETC

THAT ARE TO BE REMOVED SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE GOVERNEMENT. THIS

NOTE IS INTENDED TO BE A GENERAL STATEMENT, NOT TO IDENTIFY THAT IT IS TO OCCUR ON

THIS PROJECT. IN THE EVENT ANY ITEMS QUALIFY UNDER THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED

CURCIMSTANCES THE CONTRACTOR IS TO FULFILL THIS REQUIRMENT.

23. Will we have to survey the area?

CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE AND VERIFY ALL CONDITIONS THOROUGHTLY WITH

CONTRACT DRAWING. REFER TO SHEET G‐201 IN REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED JUNE 2020

FOR UTILITY NOTES.

CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR STAKING OUT ALL PROPOSED COORDINATES

IN CONTRACT DOCUMENTS WITH SURVEY GRADE EQUIPMENT.

24. Will you require concrete testing?

YES. REFER TO THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.

25. Will you require density testing?

26. Will there be any third party testing we need to make sure we include in our proposal?

27. Will the Government confirm each intersection need their own controller or can entire intersection/ project be controlled by one controller? Perhaps verification from the controller supplier (ITERIS) on this Opinion.

PROVIDE ONE CONTROLLER TO CONTROL BOTH HELL ON WHEELS AND OLD IRONSIDES

INTERSECTION AT CLEAR CREEK. REFER TO SHEET ES‐101A IN REVISON 2 DRAWINGS DATED

JUNE 2020.

(End of Summary of Changes)