QUESITONS AND ANSWERS.doc

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Dated 22 Apr 20009

1. QUESTION: Review of the drawings for the transitional dredging job, it was noticed that the coordinates for the project limits are inaccurate. Upon plotting the northing and easting’s, the points appeared in significantly different locations then they should have.

RESPONSE: The attached new drawings are to clear up a problem that seems to exist most likely between the old project limits and the new work project limits. The area to the north and south has been extended as well as the distance from the dock. Also note the base line had to be repositioned in order to encompass all the new project area.

2. QUESTION: Do the Silent Inspector requirements only apply to scows and hoppers? In the section titled “MECHANICAL DREDGE SILENT INSPECTOR PART 1” (Section 35 20 23), page 2, paragraph 1.4 states that “The Contractor is required to have a current Silent Inspector Certification for the dredge SI system used under this contract, at the time of issuance of Notice to Proceed.” It is our understanding that the SI Certification for mechanical dredges has not yet been instituted and is currently under discussion among the Silent Inspector Board.

RESPONSE: They are correct, the Mechanical Dredge Silent Inspector is still in the development stage, and its use right now is strictly voluntary. For this reason, we feel that Technical Specification 35 20 23 should be deleted from the solicitation.

3. QUESTION: Regarding the Proposal Schedule given in Amendment 0001, on page 6 of 29 it states that “Failure to submit an offer on all items in the schedule will result in an incomplete offer and the offer will be rejected.” Does this apply to bid items 0002, 0008, and 0012 since there may or may not be 3 dredges being mobilized in any given year?

RESPONSE: Failure to submit an Offer on all CLINs will result in an incomplete offer, however, FAR 52.215-1 allows alternate proposals to be submitted (with documentation/justification for the alteration). This means that a sub-CLIN can be deleted by the Offeror. An Alternate approach might be to offer $0.00 for a Mob/Demob sub-CLIN. By the same token, an Offeror could add a sub-CLIN for a 4th or 5th dredge (etc.) if that is what they believe they will need.

4. QUESTION: Does the entire North Extension and Barge Berths area need to be completed by August 1, 2010? It is our understanding from the “Corps/Industry Day” meeting in Anchorage that the critical issue for the Corps is to have a portion of the area complete to allow for the delivery of cranes. Please consider delineating a smaller area that would be required to be completed by August 1, 2010 and allowing the remaining area to be completed by the end of the 2010 season.

RESPONSE: The performance period for accomplishing dredging of virgin materials from the Barge Berths and North Extension is though November 1, 2010. The Port's concern is that the vessels that will be delivering the new cranes for the North Extension will need to have Project Depth along the face of the North Extension by August 2010. FAR 52.211-10 – COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK has been revised to reflect a completion date of 1 November 2010 for CLINS 0001-0004, and 1 November 2009 for CLIN 0005. A note has also been added to this FAR clause stating that “The completion date for the overall 2009-2010 dredging of virgin materials at the Barge Berths Area and North Extension is 1 November 2010, however, dredging of a 200 foot wide channel along the face of the North Extension must be completed prior to 1 August 2010.”

5. QUESTION: Given that bid item number 0003 will be accomplished during the 2009 and 2010 dredging seasons, how will payment of any in-fill during the off-season be handled?

RESPONSE: What we decided was that there would be no maintenance dredging of the Barge Berths and North Extension in 2009. CLIN 0009 exists solely for the purpose of requiring maintenance dredging of the north end and existing Port area in 2010. Presumably, this could be accomplished with a hopper dredge (if proposed) after the virgin materials and boulders, etc. are gone. This is an area where Offerors will need to show in their proposals for source selection how they intend to get this work done.

6. QUESTION: Bid item number 0003 covers 2009 and up to August 1, 2010. However, bid item number 0002 only covers 2009. Given the possibility that option items may or may not be awarded, how should potential 2nd year mobilizations & demobilizations for work covered under bid item 0003 be handled?

RESPONSE: FAR 52.211-10 – COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK has been revised to reflect a completion date of 1 November 2010 for CLINS 0001-0004, and 1 November 2009 for CLIN 0005. A note has also been added to this FAR clause stating that “The completion date for the overall 2009-2010 dredging of virgin materials at the Barge Berths Area and North Extension is 1 November 2010, however, dredging of a 200 foot wide channel along the face of the North Extension must be completed prior to 1 August 2010.”

7. QUESTION: Bid item number 0003 covers 2009 and up to August 1, 2010. However, bid item number 0005 only covers 2009. Given the possibility that option items may or may not be awarded, how should potential 2nd year surveys for work covered under bid item 0003 work be handled?

RESPONSE: Per the Pre-solicitation Conference, it was agreed that payment for dredging of virgin materials would be paid based on "Acceptance" surveys, i.e., CLIN 0005 does not apply to work accomplished under CLIN 0003. For this reason, Acceptance Surveys are included in the CLIN 0003 unit price as follows:

"North Extension and Barge Berths, Virgin Materials, Dredging, Disposal, and Acceptance Surveys, 2009-2010, complete"

8. QUESTION: Are the environmental permits available for this contract?

RESPONSE: Yes, an Environmental Assessment (EA) was performed, and a copy of the Findings Of No Significant Impacts (FONSI) is included as an attachment to Technical Specification 35 20 24. An additional environmental permit called a Biological Opinion is currently pending from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regarding the recently listed Beluga whales as an endangered species. Lack of the Biological Opinion does not impact our ability to advertize and award, but could impact the actual start of dredging.

9. QUESTION: The USACE has issued several sets of specifications and plans, some are dated the same making it difficult to tell which documents should be used. Could you please reissue a complete set, which is confirmed to be correct and updated.

RESPONSE: The most recent documents posted on FEDBIZOPS should be used bearing in mind that some documents only contain the documents that were changed from a previous posting.

10. QUESTION: The most recently issued proposal documents have drawings attached at the end of the specifications. These drawings conflict with the plans stamped “BID SET”. Please confirm that the “BID SET” documents are the correct drawings.

RESPONSE: The drawings issued 6 April 2009 stamped “Bid Set” are the correct drawings.

11. QUESTION: Several drawings have been issued showing typical cross-sections. Some of these cross-sections show payable volume on the slope to virgin material (specification drawings) while some show a vertical pay slope (bid set documents). Please confirm the slope requirements.

RESPONSE: The drawings issued 6 April 2009 marked “Bid Set” are the correct drawings. These drawings show vertical sections, i.e., no dredging of side slopes.

12. QUESTION: The cross-sections on the bid-set drawings show a Project Depth, a Required Depth and a Max Payline. Please provide a definition for project depth and confirm that required depth means minimum grade required for acceptance.

RESPONSE: Project Depth is the depth authorized by Congress. Required Depth is the minimum depth required for acceptance.

13. QUESTION: The contours shown on page C-102 and the survey depths (which are shown on Exhibit 4) conflict each other. Exhibit 4 is also stamped preliminary. Is it possible to provide the most recent survey data so we may better plan our operations?

RESPONSE: The contours shown on drawings C-102 and Exhibit 4 are for informational purposes only. Determining current actual depths is the responsibility of the Contractor as stated in Section 01 19 40.00 29 paragraph SURVEYS.

14. QUESTION: Can the Government please provide the latest survey of the disposal area. This information is necessary to determine our disposal methods and could include a drawing and/or an XYZ survey file.

RESPONSE: The Corps does not have a survey of the disposal site. General conditions can be found on NOAA drawings for this area.

15. QUESTION: The requirements for price proposal include a Bid Guarantee in “Tab B” and a Proposal Bond in “Tab E”. We believe this is the same requirement. Please confirm that a Proposal Bond is to be included in both Tab B and Tab E. of the price proposal.

ANSWER: The requirement for a bid guarantee bond has been removed from Tab B and the requirement for the proposal bond from Tab E has been removed.

16. QUESTION: Please confirm that a bid bond is required.

RESPONSE: Bid bond is not required.

17. QUESTION: Will the USACE or Port provide a contractor staging area? If so, where will this be located?

RESPONSE: Obtaining a staging area is the responsibility of the Contractor. Pursuant to Section 01 19 40.00 29, paragraphs 1.7 and 1.8:

1.7 CAMP FACILITIES

There are no Government owned camp facilities at the job site for the Contractor’s use.

1.8 UTILITIES

The furnishing of water, electricity, and other utilities for work under this contract will be the Contractor’s responsibility.

18. QUESTION: Will the USACE or Port provide a place for berthing? If so, where will this be located?

RESPONSE: Obtaining berthing space is the responsibility of the Contractor.

19. QUESTION: Can the dredging phase of an area be accepted before the boulders/pill-boxes are removed?

RESPONSE: It can be accepted for partial payment purposes subject to removal of the boulders and other obstructions.

20. QUESTION: Please confirm the number of known pill-boxes as relates to bid schedule item 0004AC. Obstruction number 30 on C- 102 states multiple pill-boxes.

RESPONSE: There is believed to be only one “pillbox”, however, it is believed that it may have broken into two pieces during an earlier attempt to partially raise it.

21. QUESTION: Can boulders and pill-boxes be deposited in the provided disposal site if deposited in deep enough water to remain below 55 ft?

RESPONSE: Yes.

22. QUESTION: A boulder sized from 8 ft to 16 ft covers a significant rock weight range. We request this range be reduced to 6 ft to 8 ft diameter boulders.

RESPONSE: It was agreed by all parties at the Corps/Industry Day Conference that boulders for the sake of payment under CLIN 0004 would be defined as those within a range of 8 to 16 feet in any dimension.

23. QUESTION: Larger boulders may need pre-treatment for removal. In this type of instance, how will it be determined that the boulder was not bigger than the top range listed on bid item 0004AA and 0004AB?

RESPONSE: All surveys are required to be multi-beam which are in sufficient detail for a joint determination of size by the Contractor and the Government.

24. QUESTION: Do bid items 0004AA and 0004AB (boulder removal) relate to the entire dredging contract or only to the north extension?

RESPONSE: They relate to all the virgin material dredging in the contract.

25. QUESTION: The answer to Question 8 in the “Questions and Answers” from the pre-proposal conference discusses divers. Please confirm that there are no diver requirements.

RESPONSE: Divers are neither required nor prohibited.

26. QUESTION: The answer to Question 14 in the “Questions and Answers” from the pre-proposal conference discusses the port schedule requirements. Please specify the dredging limits that must be completed for the north extension crane arrival.

RESPONSE: FAR 52.211-10 – COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK has been revised to reflect a completion date of 1 November 2010 for CLINS 0001-0004, and 1 November 2009 for CLIN 0005. A note has also been added to this FAR clause stating that “The completion date for the overall 2009-2010 dredging of virgin materials at the Barge Berths Area and North Extension is 1 November 2010, however, dredging of a 200 foot wide channel along the face of the North Extension must be completed prior to 1 August 2010.”

27. QUESTION: Dredging offsets from the dock must be 65 ft until dock construction is completed. What is the dock construction completion schedule?

RESPONSE: The critical Item here is not completion of the dock, but completion of pile driving activities. The Port of Anchorage’s current schedule calls for completion of this pile driving phase late in 2009. This schedule is subject to change based on several factors, and is beyond the control of the Corps.

28. QUESTION: In regards to the question above, if dredging is completed up to the 65 ft offset before the dock is finished, will the USACE or the Port be responsible for dredge stand-by time or possible demob/mob costs?

RESPONSE: Any reasonable and justifiable delays that are due to no fault of the Contractor would be evaluated by the Corps.

29. QUESTION: Would it be possible for the USACE to distribute the meeting minutes and presentation slides from the industry day held on Feb 10 and Feb 11?

RESPONSE: The Corps hired Value Management Strategies, Inc. to facilitate the February 10-11, 2009 meeting and prepare a final report to fully document the meeting and address Value Engineering alternatives. The final report is not due until mid-May, at which time it can be distributed to interested parties.