Contractor_Questions__Responses_435-448.pdf

Amend 0009 Question 435

Section 31 32 23.16 08 Para 3.2.3 Tolerances: Is it the governments intent to change the drilling and grouting tolerance for Slurry Control Drilling and Grouting to 1 foot per 5 feet drilled? Section 31 32 23.13 08 Para.

3.2.3 Permanent Foundation Drilling and Grouting changed the drilling and grouting tolerance to 1 foot per 50 feet drilled.

No. Both 31 32 23.13 08 Permanent Foundation Drilling and Grouting, and 31 32 23.16 08 Tolerances Slurry Control Drilling and Grouting should be 1 foot per 50 feet. Please see correction/revision to 31 32 23.16 08, paragraph

3.2.3 Tolerances and Deviations. Also see correction to 31 32 23.16 08, paragraph Grout Line Locations, Inclinations, and Depths. Grout line offset shall be 5 feet, rather than 50.

AMEND

Question 436 Per the answer to Question #15 included in Amendment 008, the government states to see revised Section 00100-02 in regards to Data Management System information to be included in the proposal. Is it the governments intent not to include a separate tab with information about the Data Management System within the proposal?

The Data Management System subfactor has been removed from the proposal submission requirements.

AMEND

Question 437 Does the government anticipate releasing another Amendment any time soon? Yes. Reference Amendment 0009.

AMEND

Question 438 We request the proposal date be extended 6 weeks to provide time to review amendment #8, re-evaluate options for cutoff wall design and means & methods, and prepare a proposal. This additional time is essential for our team. Equally critical is that we know the new date as soon as possible, ideally by end of this week.

No. The proposal due date remains unchanged.

AMEND

Question 439 Specification section 31 32 23.13 08 – 3.2.4, states “Methods shall not adversely introduce water or grout into the embankment or foundation soils.” Please quantitatively define this statement? Not addressed in new specs.

Please see revised Specification Sections 31 32 23.13 08 and 31 32 23.16 08, paragraph 3.2.4 Standpipe.

AMEND

Question 440 Specification section 31 32 23.13 08 – 3.3.11 states “Boreholes shall be washed with provisions in place to maintain water within the borehole.” Please define this statement? Not addressed in new specs.

Please see revised Specification Sections 31 32 23.13 08 and 31 32 23.16 08, paragraph 3.3.12 Pressure Washing.

AMEND

Question 441 In section 31 00 00 3.3.2 Work Platform design- It is unclear if for the construction of the temporary work platform, if both the “3’-6” Rock Transition” and the “2’-0” Rock Protection” covering the dam rock fill need to be removed before placement of the work platform fill or just the 2’-0” Rock Protection. Please clarify. This is addressed in question 259 but not answered.

The only excavation of existing material in this contract is associated with constructing the base geometry for work platform, final crest configuration, and stone erosion protection features. See drawings for the base geometry of these features. Accordingly, only small volumes of rock transition or rock protection must be removed.

AMEND

Question 442 Who was awarded the 2012 contract to fully automate the existing dam instrumentation? Not addressed. Information regarding the Instrumentation Automation was included in the ADAS Equipment List in Volume 3 - Attachments to Specifications provided with Amendment 0008. This instrumentation contract has not been awarded but all of the information necessary for bidding purposes has been provided.

AMEND

Question 443 The new Amend 8 Pricing Schedule features a number of bid items that have contractor fill in quantities and require quantity backup sheets to be submitted. Please confirm where in the proposal documents these quantity backup sheets (0062AB and others) are to be included.

The introduction to Section 00100-3 CONTENT OF PROPOSAL, specifies the Quality Backup Sheets are to be included in Volume 1, Tab I - Sub Factor 1A. Quantity Backup Sheets are to be included under Factor IA and tabbed separately. An excel version of the Quantity Backup Sheets shall also be provided.

QUESTIONS BELOW HERE WERE SUBMITTED AFTER Amend 0008-30 Aug 2013

AMEND

Question 444 We also note that there is a conflict in the Land Surveyor’s qualifications Section 01 32 23 1.6.1 which state that the 5yr marine experience is no longer required but the CQC Personnel Qualifications Section 01 45

00.00 10 3.6.4 still shows that it is. Please clarify.

Please see revised specification Section 01 45 00.00 10, paragraph 3.6.4 CQC Personnel.

AMEND

Question 445 We have not completely identified all of the items and changes in this amendment which may still may produce new questions. Given all of the work that is required and the limited time available we respectfully ask that you please extend the proposal due date at least 8 more weeks so that we can properly prepare our proposal.

No. The proposal due date remains unchanged.

AMEND

Question 446 Q: On Question 351, Amend 8, SPEC 31 56 10 CUTOFF WALL CONSTRUCTION ARTICLE 3.3.5 Which of the below shown joint overlap options between columnar elements shall be considered as being the correct one?

A: Option 2 meets the requirements of the specifications. See Specification Section 31 56 10.00 08 for additional details of requirements. *See attached diagram

FYI General Note Please see revised gradation in Section 31 09 13.00 08

INSTRUMENTATION AND MONITORING

AMEND

Question 447 In response to Addendum 8 released 08/30/13 for the referenced solicitation we suggest the following:

Creation of separate pay items for off-site fill and on-site fill. Creation of separate pay items for on-site disposal and off-site disposal. This approach should resolve the current situation that puts a risk of several million dollars on the contractor. By creating separate pay items this issue is fixed in an equitable way between the Government and the Contractor. It allows for transparency and for the Government to retain the advantages of a competitive bid process and retain savings based on post-award evaluation of on-site fill/disposal while unburdening the Contractor of excessive risk and the need to put excessive contingency into the proposal price. It is an approach that is similar in spirit to the differing site conditions FAR clause.

No changes have been made to the Contract in response to this question/comment.

AMEND

Question 448

We suggest the segregation of the slurry grouting scope from the foundation grouting scope and the conversion of the slurry grouting scope from a unit rate item into a lump sum. This modification will create a bid process that removes the current possibility of a bidder submitting an artificially lower price by underestimating their slurry grouting quantity.

Under Factor IA Means and Method the Offeror-proposed quantities and quantity backup sheets will be evaluated for reasonableness as well as their potential to satisfy the contract requirements from a technical and dam safety prospective. Proposed quantities as they relate to the Offeror’s price proposal, including potential quantity unbalancing, shall be evaluated under Factor VI Price.

Sheet1