Questions and Answers.pdf

BIDDER QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

DAM SAFETY ASSURANCE PHASE V, STILLING BASIN REPAIRS

BLUESTONE DAM, HINTON, WEST VIRGINIA

IFB No. W9123719B0001

TO ALL HOLDERS OF BID DOCUMENTS

The following are responses to questions received from bidders at the pre-proposal meeting. These are clarifications to the questions.

Question 1: Please clarify the intent of Definitive Responsibility Criteria (a). Criteria requires four projects showing experience with placing over 75,000 CY of mass concrete with 1.5 inch (or greater) aggregate. Is the 75,000 CY quantity a cumulative total among all four projects listed?

Answer: Cumulative among all projects submitted. Please see revised Definitive Responsibility Criteria as shown in Amendment 0003, Section 00 21 00.

Question 2: Please clarify the WV B&O taxes that will apply.

Question 2.a: What is the percentage of any state/local B&O tax?

Question 2.b: Does this tax apply to the prime contractor and all subcontractors (i.e. prime contractor pays on full contract amount and subcontractors pay on the subcontract amount)?

Question 2.c: Does this tax apply to material and equipment vendors also?

Answer: Please contact state and local governments for any tax liabilities associated with working in the area.

Question 3: Given the short solicitation period for a project of this magnitude, will the government issue electronic (AutoCAD) files for the project to aid the contractors in preparation of our bids?

Answer: The Government will not be issuing any type of CAD files for the bidding process.

Question 4: To the best of my knowledge DSI does not manufacture hydraulic jacks. They have someone else like Enerpac, Simpex, etc build the jack for them. Is there any reason we would not be able to use our own jacks on our strand anchors if we were selected as the anchor supplier for Bluestone?

Answer: The jack specified is a particular jack that has been used previously on the project for testing. It is available from DSI for rent. The purpose of specifying a particular jack is to reduce the variables between phases of testing that contribute to error in the results which is necessary to accurately determine load and analyze trends in the data.

Question 5: The RFP includes DFAR 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting (OCT 2016), as a requirement for the Project. DFAR 252.204-7012 requires the Contractor to implement the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-

171. NIST SP 800-171 requires a substantial level of security which cannot easily be met by Contractors of the type who would bid the Project without expending significant resources and restructuring certain company-wide controls and processes. DFAR 252.204-7012 also requires its provisions and the requirements of NIST SP 800-171 be incorporated into all subcontracts, thereby making it more difficult, and in many cases impossible to involve specialty subcontractors, including local and small businesses. We would like to request if DFAR 252.204-7012 and other associated DFARS 252.204-7000, 7003, 7004, 7008, 7012, 7015 are necessary for the Project or if they can be waived or redacted from the Specifications and prospective contract.

Answer: The incorporation of these clauses is required by the DFARS, and we are not currently aware of an exception or waiver for this contract.

Question 6: In regards to the project drawings, can the Government provide the project CAD files for reference only?

Answer: See answer to Question No. 3.

Question 7: Upon review of the technical specifications provided with the above referenced solicitation, we did not see a Division 01 Section on Measurement and Payment. We have commonly seen this on other USACE projects of similar complexity and length. The Measurement and Payment specification will outline what is to be included in the unit prices of the various schedule of value items contained within the solicitation. This is extremely helpful to confirm what is to be included in the “Job” unit items contained within the solicitation especially given the limited time to estimate a project of this magnitude.

Does the Government intend on making this specification available for this solicitation through a future amendment?

Answer: We typically do not have a specific section for measurement and payment. Rather, this is addressed at the end of each section of the specifications. Section 01 22 00.00 20 is included, which details the process for payment.

Question 8: Reference Section 00 10 00 – Solicitation, Bid Schedule, Item No. 92 Line Drilling. Please further define the method of measurement and payment for this item currently measured in Sq. Yd.

Answer: See Specification Section 31 00 00 EXCAVATION for measurement and payment of line drilling.

Question 9: Reference Section 00 10 00 – Solicitation, Bid Schedule, Item No. 92 Line Drilling. If the bidding contractor elects to use a means/methods other than line drilling, will Item No. 92 be paid to the contractor based on the Sq. Yd. of material prepared?

Answer: For the bidding process, contractors must submit bids that reflect the measurement and payment criteria in Specification Section 31 00 00 EXCAVATION. The successful bidder may propose another method to create the vertical rock surfaces, provided it produces similar or better results and is determined to be acceptable by the Government. The successful bidder will be required to demonstrate that the change in method provides a benefit to the Government in quality, schedule, cost, or a combination of these. The terms of payment may be in square yards unless the contractor proposes an alternative method of measurement more suited to the means that is acceptable to the Government.

Question 10: Please elaborate on the deciding factors which resulted in the prescribed contract length of 3,285 calendar days (9 years). This contract length seems excessive for the scope of the project and is an area of concern for bidding contractors.

Answer: It is the responsibility of the contractor to determine how to schedule the work, while taking into consideration the defined restrictions and site limitations.

Question 11: Please confirm that this project is fully funded and that the available funds are not specifically allocated over the length of the contract (i.e., please verify that portions of the projects funding are not restricted to specific calendar or fiscal years).

Answer: At this time, it is anticipated that upon award the contract will be fully funded without fiscal or calendar year funding constraints.

Question 12: Reference Section 01 32 01. 00 10 – Project Schedule, Part 3.2.3.3 Early Project Completion. The last sentence of this section indicates “The Government is under no obligation to accelerate activities for which it is responsible to support a proposed early contract completion.” Please clarify and give specific examples of activities which the Government would be responsible for in this context.

Answer: The Government will not shorten items such as but not limited to the minimum 30 day review times for shop drawing or guarantee expedited review of technical issues.

Question 13: Are there any restrictions on night shift work?

Answer: The contractor can work nightshift but there are some activities that are restricted, such as truck traffic on Miller Ave and processing excavated material. See Specification Section 01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES, paragraph

1.10.1 and Specification Section 31 23 00.00 20 FILLS AND BACKFILLS, paragraph 1.6.5.

Question 14: Are scheduled shift lengths restricted to only 8 hours per day? (i.e., would the Government consider scheduled 10 hour shifts as “acceleration”?)

Answer: The Contractor may work shifts longer than 8 hours.

The Government would not consider 10 hour shifts as acceleration. However there are some activities that have limited work hours such as truck traffic on Miller Ave and processing excavated material. See Specification Section 01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES, paragraph 1.10.1 and Specification Section 31 23 00.00 20 FILLS AND BACKFILLS, paragraph 1.6.5.

Question 15: Are there any restrictions on weekend work?

(i.e., would the Government consider a scheduled 6 day work week as “acceleration”?)

Answer: The contractor can work weekends but there are some activities that are restricted on weekends, such as truck traffic on Miller Ave and processing excavated material. See Specification Section 01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES, paragraph 1.10.1 and Specification Section 31 23

00.00 20 FILLS AND BACKFILLS, paragraph 1.6.5.

Question 16: Reference specification section 31 68 13, Page 13.

In the body of the Prestressing Steel paragraph there is reference to an example procedure utilized during a previous phase of construction. Please furnish this example procedure.

Answer: Example has been added to the end of Section 31 68 12 ROCK ANCHORS - CONVENTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE per Amendment 0003.

Question 17: Reference Section 01 60 00.00 40, 3.9.2 & 3.10.2 – These two paragraphs are titled the same and have nearly identical content, please clarify the difference (if there is intended to be a difference). Please further define the difference of how the $3,000,000.00 reimbursable cost and the $1,000,000.00 reimbursable costs are to be applied.

Answer: This is an administrative error and should read $3,000,000.00 in all sections. See Section 01 60 00 MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT, Paragraph 3.10.3 revised in Amendment 0003.

Question 18: Reference drawing CS103 (Volume 1), what information is available on the existing penstock dike (i.e., what material is it constructed of, how much is fill, etc.)?

Answer: The existing penstock dike consists of in situ soils (typically fine-grained soils) overlain by shot rock fill.

Several borings have been drilled through this area to obtain bedrock information, but overburden was not sampled in those holes. See plan sets from prior phases of construction work at Bluestone Dam provided in Volume 3 - For Information Purposes Only (FIPO) Drawings.

Question 19: It is not feasible to prepare a quality, competitive bid by October 31. As such, we request the bid date be extended a minimum of six (6) additional weeks to no earlier than December 12. This will allow the minimum time necessary to understand the project requirements, determine the construction means & methods, develop a construction schedule/sequence, receive subcontractor/supplier pricing, and prepare an estimate/bid.

Answer: The bid opening has been extended to December 6, 2019 per Amendment 0002, issued on October 9, 2019.

Question 20: CS107 depicts the Penstock Exit Channel. Please provide details for when this needs to be operational. Please provide details for when this can be removed to install the fishing pier access road.

Answer: To clarify when the Exit Channel can be excavated, sheet “CS107 Penstock Exit Channel Plan and Profile,” has been revised per Amendment 0003. A schematic outline of the temporary flow diversion, through the existing dike, has been shown on the plan on this sheet and this note was added, “5. For details and construction sequencing, of temporary Flow Diversion System, see sheet ST040 and specifications. The Exit Channel shall not be excavated until Flow Diversion System is no longer required as directed by the COR.” Other than described above there are no other restrictions or time frame for excavating the Exit Channel or for constructing the Fishing Pier Access Road.

Question 21: Specification Section 03 70 00 MASS CONCRETE, paragraph 2.2.2 Proportional Responsibility references preliminary mixture proportioning studies and thermal studies.

Can you please provide these?

Answer: The requested studies were posted to FBO.gov on October 9, 2019.

Question 22: Specification section 01 60 00.00 MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT, paragraph 3.9.3 Structural Steel and Grating Material provides an FIO material inventory. Can the government provide FIO sketches, pictures, and previous submittals to determine if these materials are adequate for use?

Answer: No, the Government will not be providing additional information on the Structural Steel and Grating Material.

Bidders may schedule a site visit and review the inventory at this time. Refer to FAR Clause 52.236-4(g) Physical data, which states: "Field Information. Contractors who desire an escort at the site or who require field information should contact:

Resident Engineer, HC78 Box 6C, Hinton, WV 25951, Telephone 304- 466-6950.

Question 23: Has any permeability testing of the foundation been undertaken for the bore holes relevant to the tendered works, particularly with regard to the stilling basin?

Answer: Water pressure testing data is provided on the boring logs in Section 00 01 15 BORING LOGS, including testing for holes within the stilling basin (see drawings B-101 to B-104 for boring locations).

Question 24: Can water from the New River be used for general site use – hole flushing, dust control etc. (not grouting or concrete)? Assuming water is available at no cost for construction purposes?

Answer: Water from the New River can be used provided it is free from injurious amounts of sewage, oil, acid, alkali, salts or organic material.

Question 25: With regard to the Government’s right to independently survey drilled holes, although the contractor is directed to assist, will time extension and costs be recoverable? Is there a quantity of holes that could be expected to require assisting for this additional Government survey?

Answer: Time extension and costs will not be recoverable. A minimum of 10% will be QA surveyed by the Government.

Question 26: After treatment of water from drill holes or excavated areas to meet environmental standards, it’s assumed this water can be released into the New River. Please confirm.

Answer: Without an NPDES permit, no discharge of any kind may be made into the New River. It is the contractor’s responsibility to obtain an NPDES permit to discharge treated water or any other material into the New River.

Question 27: With respect to Section 31 68 12, Clause 3.2.9.3, what is the distance from a gallery that an anchor can be away from it before inspection of the gallery is not required?

Answer: Subparagraph 3.2.9.3 has been deleted from Section 31 68 12 ROCK ANCHORS - CONVENTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE per Amendment 0003.

Question 28: With respect to Clause 3.2.10, What is the trigger distance from an existing anchor that interception bore hole camera logging is required?

Answer: Subparagraph 3.2.10 has been deleted from Section 31 68 12 ROCK ANCHORS - CONVENTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE per Amendment 0003.

Question 29: With respect to Section 31 68 12, Clause 3.6 Should an anchor fail the creep test, and the contractor is otherwise compliant having met all other aspects of the specification, but noting that the global anchor design (Anchor size, founding depth, bond length, hole diameter and loadings) have been specified by the Government, how could the responsibility of the anchor performance and any replacement be the responsibility of the contractor?

Answer: As it relates to Sections 31 68 12 ROCK ANCHORS - CONVENTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE and 31 68 13 ROCK ANCHORS - DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE, Paragraph 3.6 ACCEPTANCE, 3.6.1 General, a. Creep, “If the anchor does not meet this criterion, and the cause of the behavior is not investigated and explained to the satisfaction of the Contracting Officer, the anchor shall be rejected.” An issue that has affected creep test results is grout tube damage and or incorrect grout tip location that allows the grout to fall thru water causing the in place grout to be much weaker than the grout samples taken at the top of the hole.

Question 30: Can USACE provide an item in the bid schedule that nominates the expected number of waterproof grouting/redrilling operations per anchor location?

Answer: The Contractor may use the bid item quantities as a guide for the number of watertightness grouting/redrilling operations. Watertightness grouting and redrilling each have associated bid items that cover costs of this work.

Question 31: In Section 31 68 12 Paragraph 3.2.2 “Drilling through Existing Structures” and on sheet S-703 it is indicated that while drilling we will encounter ‘metal and other material’ as well as ‘internal framing’. Can USACE provide the type of materials and approximate dimensions of this framing and any other foreign objects we are expected to encounter during drilling?

Answer: A comprehensive list of types and geometries of foreign material that may be encountered during drilling is not available. The “For Information Purposes Only” drawings provide some information on the internal framing and other items that may be encountered when drilling.

Question 32: Can USACE provide the number of times (in percentage terms) that foreign objects were encountered during the anchor drilling for Phases 1-4 when drilling through the dam? What size obstructions were typically encountered?

Answer: The requested information is not available.

Question 33: What percentage of the inclined completed anchors at the dam toe were subject to artesian conditions? How many waterproofing and redrilling cycles were typical per anchor?

Answer: No inclined anchors in the dam had artesian conditions at the top of hole. The following spreadsheets show the number of watertightness tests that were performed for the Phase 2B and Phase 4 anchors listed. This list does not include all anchors, but only those for which data has been compiled at this time.

Data has also been provided for Phase 3 anchor watertightness testing including a plan view showing contoured water volume takes across the penstock basin. Higher water takes are typical with fractured rock associated with the fault that is present in that area.

Anchor ID

Watertightness

Test Total Anchor ID

Watertightness

Test Total Anchor ID

Watertightness

Test Total Anchor ID

Watertightness

Test Total Anchor ID

Watertightness

Test Total Anchor ID

Watertightness

Test Total Anchor ID

Watertightness

Test Total

A‐10‐09 2 A‐18‐21 2 A‐20‐18 1 A‐25‐12 3 A‐30‐08 2 A‐35‐08 2 A‐41‐03 2

A‐10‐10 1 A‐18‐22 4 A‐20‐19 2 A‐26‐02 2 A‐30‐09 2 A‐35‐09 2 A‐41‐04 2

A‐11‐12 2 A‐18‐23 2 A‐20‐20 1 A‐26‐03 2 A‐30‐10 2 A‐35‐10 2 A‐41‐05 2

A‐11‐13 2 A‐18‐24 2 A‐21‐09 2 A‐26‐04 2 A‐31‐02 2 A‐36‐05 2 A‐41‐06 2

A‐11‐14 2 A‐18‐25 2 A‐21‐10 2 A‐26‐05 2 A‐31‐03 1 A‐36‐06 3 A‐41‐07 2

A‐12‐12 2 A‐18‐26 3 A‐21‐11 2 A‐26‐06 2 A‐31‐04 1 A‐36‐07 2 A‐41‐08 2

A‐12‐13 2 A‐18‐27 3 A‐21‐12 1 A‐26‐07 3 A‐31‐05 1 A‐36‐08 4 A‐41‐09 2

A‐12‐14 2 A‐18‐28 2 A‐21‐13 1 A‐26‐08 2 A‐31‐06 1 A‐36‐09 2 A‐41‐10 2

A‐12‐15 2 A‐18‐29 2 A‐21‐14 2 A‐26‐09 3 A‐31‐07 1 A‐36‐10 2 A‐42‐05 2

A‐12‐16 2 A‐18‐30 2 A‐21‐15 2 A‐26‐10 2 A‐31‐08 1 A‐37‐01 2 A‐42‐06 2

A‐12‐17 3 A‐18‐31 2 A‐21‐16 2 A‐27‐02 2 A‐31‐09 2 A‐37‐02 2 A‐42‐07 2

A‐12‐18 3 A‐18‐32 2 A‐21‐17 2 A‐27‐03 2 A‐31‐10 2 A‐37‐03 2 A‐42‐08 2

A‐12‐19 3 A‐19‐11 3 A‐21‐18 2 A‐27‐04 2 A‐32‐03 2 A‐37‐04 2 A‐42‐09 2

A‐12‐20 1 A‐19‐12 2 A‐21‐20 2 A‐27‐05 2 A‐32‐04 2 A‐37‐05 2 A‐42‐10 2

A‐12‐21 2 A‐19‐13 3 A‐22‐01 2 A‐27‐06 2 A‐32‐05 2 A‐37‐06 1 A‐42‐11 2

A‐12‐22 2 A‐19‐14 2 A‐22‐02 2 A‐27‐07 1 A‐32‐06 2 A‐37‐07 2 A‐42‐12 2

A‐14‐07 2 A‐19‐15 3 A‐22‐03 2 A‐27‐08 2 A‐32‐07 2 A‐37‐08 2 A‐43‐05 3

A‐14‐08 2 A‐19‐16 3 A‐22‐04 2 A‐27‐09 2 A‐32‐08 2 A‐38‐03 1 A‐43‐06 2

A‐17‐09 5 A‐19‐17 3 A‐22‐05 3 A‐27‐10 1 A‐32‐09 2 A‐38‐04 1 A‐43‐07 1

A‐17‐10 4 A‐19‐18 2 A‐22‐06 2 A‐28‐02 2 A‐32‐10 2 A‐38‐05 1 A‐43‐08 2

A‐17‐11 3 A‐19‐19 3 A‐22‐07 2 A‐28‐03 2 A‐33‐06 1 A‐38‐06 2 A‐43‐09 2

A‐17‐13 3 A‐19‐20 2 A‐23‐01 3 A‐28‐04 2 A‐33‐07 1 A‐38‐07 2 A‐43‐10 2

A‐17‐14 3 A‐19‐21 4 A‐23‐02 2 A‐28‐05 3 A‐33‐08 1 A‐38‐08 2 A‐43‐11 2

A‐17‐15 5 A‐19‐22 2 A‐23‐03 1 A‐28‐06 2 A‐34‐02 2 A‐39‐03 2 A‐43‐12 2

A‐17‐16 3 A‐19‐23 3 A‐23‐04 1 A‐28‐07 2 A‐34‐03 2 A‐39‐04 2 A‐44‐06 2

A‐17‐17 5 A‐19‐24 2 A‐23‐05 2 A‐28‐08 2 A‐34‐04 2 A‐39‐05 2 A‐44‐07 2

A‐17‐18 3 A‐19‐25 2 A‐23‐06 2 A‐28‐09 2 A‐34‐05 2 A‐39‐06 1 A‐44‐08 1

A‐17‐19 5 A‐19‐26 2 A‐23‐07 2 A‐28‐10 2 A‐34‐06 1 A‐39‐07 2 A‐44‐09 1

A‐17‐20 2 A‐20‐08 2 A‐23‐08 2 A‐29‐07 2 A‐34‐07 2 A‐39‐08 2 A‐44‐10 2

A‐18‐12 2 A‐20‐09 2 A‐23‐09 2 A‐29‐08 2 A‐34‐08 2 A‐39‐09 2 A‐44‐11 2

A‐18‐13 2 A‐20‐10 2 A‐23‐10 2 A‐29‐09 2 A‐34‐09 2 A‐39‐10 2 A‐44‐12 3

A‐18‐14 3 A‐20‐11 2 A‐25‐05 2 A‐29‐10 2 A‐34‐10 2 A‐40‐03 3 A‐44‐13 2

A‐18‐15 2 A‐20‐12 1 A‐25‐06 2 A‐30‐02 2 A‐35‐01 2 A‐40‐04 2 A‐44‐14 2

A‐18‐16 3 A‐20‐13 2 A‐25‐07 2 A‐30‐03 2 A‐35‐02 2 A‐40‐05 2 A‐45‐04 2

A‐18‐17 2 A‐20‐14 2 A‐25‐08 1 A‐30‐04 2 A‐35‐03 1 A‐40‐06 2 A‐45‐05 1

A‐18‐18 3 A‐20‐15 2 A‐25‐09 2 A‐30‐05 3 A‐35‐04 1 A‐40‐07 2 A‐45‐06 2

A‐18‐19 2 A‐20‐16 1 A‐25‐10 2 A‐30‐06 2 A‐35‐05 2 A‐40‐08 2 A‐45‐07 1

A‐18‐20 3 A‐20‐17 2 A‐25‐11 1 A‐30‐07 2 A‐35‐07 2 A‐41‐02 2 A‐45‐08 1

A‐45‐09 2

A‐45‐10 2

A‐45‐11 2

A‐45‐12 2

A‐45‐13 2

A‐45‐14 2

A‐45‐15 2

A‐46‐06 1

A‐46‐07 2

BLUESTONE PH 4

Question 34: Reference Specification section 00 80 00, which has detailed requirements for diving operations. Please clarify if there are specific work activities which will only be permitted using divers.

Answer: There are specific activities that will require divers such as, but not limited to, inspection of driven piling and inspection of unwater concrete surfaces.

Question 35: Reference specification section 00 80 00, 1.24.3.

As part of the Lake Restrictions it reads: “the Contractor shall not have use of Government gantry crane”.

Question 35.a: Are there any instances where the use of the government gantry crane would be permitted (i.e. the installation of the anchors on top of the dam)?

Answer: No, except as noted to install flow diverter system;

coordination with operations is required.

Question 35.b: Some of the work on the top of the dam (i.e.

the installation of the anchors) will likely restrict access on top of the dam and the availability for the Government to use the gantry crane across its full range of travel. Are there specific requirements or limitations which need to be considered when bidding the project as it relates to the access on top of the dam?

Answer: Reference contract clause 52.236-4, the Contractors activity shall not impact the operations of the dam for the duration of the contract. Reference spec section 00 80 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, paragraph 1.24.3 the contractors activities shall not interfere with the operation of the gantry crane.

Question 36: Once the Flow Diversion System is operational (reference specification section 01 57 20.00 10 & drawing ST040), are there any other limitations on unwatering the right side stilling basin?

Answer: Yes. All existing anchors of the right training wall shall be de-tensioned prior to dewatering the right side of the stilling basin as indicated in SECTION 00 80 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, Paragraph “CONSTRUCTION RESTRICTIONS” of Amendment 0003.

Question 37: Upon initial review of the solicitation documents and the complexity and time duration of this project, we ask that the Corps consider a 45-day extension to the bid date of October 31, 2019.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 38: The cutoff for questions is October 11. Request extended to reasonable date.

Answer: The deadline for questions was extended to October 18, 2019 per Amendment 0002, issued on October 9, 2019.

Question 39: This presentation will not be made available – request that it is because the quality in this building is poor, hard to read. Would be helpful for those that weren’t here or couldn’t read.

Answer: The presentation was posted to FBO.gov on October 9, 2019.

Question 40: Regarding Drawing CS406, Construction Work Limits, it shows that the downstream sloping face of dam is available for construction at NTP. If a walkway or any kind of platform is constructed across the dam, could it remain for duration of project?

Answer: Drawing CS406 has been misinterpreted. The entire downstream sloping face of the dam is not within the Contractor’s Work Limits (CWL), therefore, not all of the face is available at Notice to Proceed (NTP). This area, and the basin itself, is within the bounds of Restricted Work Limits 1 (RWL1), which shall be available when the cofferdam contract is complete 31 May 2020. See drawing CS411. If a walkway or platform is proposed by the Contractor a shop drawing will need to be submitted and approved. In addition, the Contractor assumes all risk and responsibility of the walkway or platform.

Question 41: At what time will operations operate strictly out of left side of the dam? At NTP? Will the flow diversion system have to be in? Shutting off flow on right side, help to push the cofferdam out. Can you put flow diversion system in at the same time you put cofferdam in?

Answer: Specifications have been revised in Amendment 0003 to clarify sequencing with respect to flow diversion and stoppage of flow on the right side. The contractor will be at liberty to choose when to stop flow in coordination with operations.

However, flow diversion must be functional prior to stopping right side flow and all other construction restrictions in Section 00 80 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS must be satisfied.

Question 42: Left training wall, we have access to that area after May 2020, can demolition, etc., be performed at any time after that?

Answer: Work on the left training wall may be performed while the left side of the basin is operational as provided in SECTION 00 80 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, Paragraph “CONSTRUCTION RESTRICTIONS” of Amendment 0003.

Question 43: Where is silica fume required in contract?

Answer: The concrete constituent proportions, including silica fume proportions, noted within the Preliminary Concrete Mixture Proportioning Report provided on FBO.gov are not guaranteed proportions for use as the final Government concrete mixture proportions for the project. These are preliminary test results and should not be construed as final proportions.

Question 44: Why can’t the preliminary mix design be provided prior?

Answer: See answer to Question No. 21.

Question 45: Are there restrictions for installing anchors relative to how much concrete is placed, strength of concrete, can we install anchors 100 feet from existing concrete, and then construct a monolith when it reaches strength – can we install anchors at that point?

Answer: Restrictions for drilling, watertightness testing, grouting, and anchor testing have been added to Sections 31 68 12 ROCK ANCHORS - CONVENTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE and 31 68 13 ROCK ANCHORS - DIRECTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE per Amendment 0003.

Question 46: Some language in specs that reference, if you hit existing anchors, it’s your responsibility to fix that anchor.

But, if we come to find out the existing anchor was in the wrong spot and our anchor is where it’s supposed to be, and we’re drilling within tolerances, that’s not our responsibility. Can you confirm that?

Answer: If an anchor hole, grout hole, or drain hole being drilled is within the tolerance cone of the theoretical specified centerline of the hole at the correct location, batter, and azimuth as shown in the drawings and required in the specifications and an anchor or its corrosion protection is intercepted within the tolerance cone of the hole being drilled, the contractor shall not be found at fault. Any damage to an anchor or its corrosion protection that is the result of the Contractor failing to drill a drain or grout hole at the required location, azimuth, batter, or alignment tolerance (i.e., the hole is drilled outside of the tolerance cone of the theoretical specified centerline for the drain or grout hole) will require replacement of the anchor at the Contractor's expense. See paragraph 3.3.2 in Section 31 32 23 DRAIN, INSTRUMENTATION, AND GROUT HOLE DRILLING AND GROUTING as revised in Amendment 0003.

Question 47: Clarify when this amendment will be issued?

Answer: At the pre-bid it was mentioned the amendment would be issued around October 24th; however, due to the additional time allowed for questions this has changed to approximately November 12th.

Question 48: Will you consider extending it more? To mid- December?

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 49: Any way you could tell us that within the next couple days? How likely is that? If considering extending any further than that, we’d like to know sooner than October 24.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 50: Given the environment of the Pre-Bid Meeting, it was difficult to see and hear all of the PowerPoint presentations. Would the Owner consider making that document and the audio recording of the presentations available to the Contractors for a more thorough understanding of the project?

Answer: The presentation slides were posted to FBO.gov on October 9, 2019. The video/audio recording will not be provided.

Question 51: We understand the Owner is planning to reschedule the bid opening to mid-November. While this is helpful, we agree with the other Contractor’s comments at the Pre-Bid Meeting to request moving the bid date back to mid-December.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 52: The earliest possible notification of the eventual bid date would be helpful in deciding to bid or not bid and in planning our estimating resources accordingly.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 53: The installation and anchoring of the Cofferdam Thrust Block appears to be constructed in the un-watered right basin. Can the Contractor assume that the cofferdam is stable in this un-watered condition prior to the installation of the thrust block?

Answer: Yes.

Question 54: Could the Owner identify any specific work tasks that they are requiring be done from a floating plant?

Answer: The parameters for the use of floating plant have been included in the specification if the successful bidder chooses to use floating plant.

Question 55: Are there any “No Work” restrictions in the contract that apply to the activities in an un-watered basin?

Answer: See Specification 00 80 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS Section’s Site Restriction and Stilling Basin Evacuation and Delay.

Question 56: Can the Owner identify the time of year and duration they can hold the lake pool elevation at 1410 for purposes of installing the Water Diversion System?

Answer: Normal pool for the lake is 1410 from 1 April to 1 December. Outside this interval, winter pool is 1406.

Question 57: Will the Owner be supplying the Cellular Cofferdam Sheet Piling for the remaining 2 cells and 2 arches that make the Stilling Basin Cofferdam complete in this contract?

Answer: No, the Contractor shall be required to furnish this piling as indicated in Section 31 41 16 METAL SHEET PILING.

Question 58: Additional Solicitation Requirements, A. "Sealed offer in original ... are due at the place specified in Item 8 by 01:00 PM local time 31 Oct 2018". Due to the technical nature of the project, along with understanding the physical limiting factors such as river flows and etc., we respectfully request a postponement of the by Solicitation due date by a minimum of 30 calendar days.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 59: Is the Project fully funded for the entire 108-month duration, or is funding dependent upon annual fiscal appropriations?

Answer: See answer to Question No. 11.

Question 60: Specification 31 68 12 Rock Anchors - Conventionally Drilled Type Section 3.2.1.3 requires the contractor to grout any foundation drains that are intercepted by the anchor drilling operation. Section 3.7 does not list a Pay Item for this work. Specification 31 68 13 Rock Anchors - Directionally Drilled Type Section 3.2.1.3 has similar wording and includes Section 3.7.10 description for Pay Item #162 as a way to pay for the work. Why is it paid for in one type and not paid for in the other?

Answer: Section 31 68 12 ROCK ANCHORS - CONVENTIONALLY DRILLED TYPE, 3.2.1.3 “Foundation Drain and/or Uplift Cell

Interception/Interconnection”, the paragraphs have been deleted per Amendment 0003.

Question 61: Drawing SR-504, Detail D, FISHING PIER COLUMN DETAIL indicates the vertical reinforcement is (11) #9 bars evenly spaced but only 10 EA bars are shown graphically. Please advise.

Answer: There should be 11 - #9 bars spaced evenly in the columns. Drawing has been corrected in Amendment 0003 to reflect the comment and response.

Question 62: Please advise under which Item No. the Overlook Railing will be paid. Section 03 30 00 General, Part 3.14.3.2.

Answer: The overlook railing will be paid under section 05 52

00 ALUMINUM RAILINGS.

Question 63: The drawings provide conflicting information for the total length of the Left Field Retaining Wall. On Sheets SR- 105 and SR-106, the Plan View of the Left Field Retaining Wall indicates a total wall length of 138.61'. On Sheet SR-106, the profile view of the same wall indicates a total wall length of 150.17'. Please advise.

Answer: The accurate length is 150.17’. Drawings SR-105 and SR-106 have been corrected in Amendment 0003.

Question 64: Please advise under which Item No. the Fishing Pier will be paid shown on drawings SR-103, SR-300 and SR-504.

Answer: The fishing pier shall be paid under the bid item “Right Recreation Fishing Pier”. It will be as a lump sum item.

Question 65: Reference is made to Section 03 30 00, Parts 3.14.2.2, 3.14.3.2 and 3.14.7.2 which is PAYMENT for General Concrete, Concrete Pavement and Baseball Diamond Retaining Wall, respectively. These sections are not clear on whether the reinforcement is incidental or to be paid under Item 27 Deformed Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement. It states, "...these costs will not include the cost of items that are specified to be paid for separately." but also states, "Payment shall include...reinforcement..." Please advise.

Answer: Work and items covered in Section 03 30 00 CONCRETE FOR RECREATION FEATURES are for the Recreation Features where Item 27 is for Stilling Basin Features. Payment for General Concrete, Concrete Pavement, and Baseball Diamond Retaining Wall shall include all costs related to reinforcement in these bid items.

Question 66: We were told at the pre-bid meeting that consideration would be given to pushing the bid date to mid- December. That would be our request and we would ask that you issue the revised date ASAP and not wait until Amendment 2 schedule for late October issuance.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 67: At the pre-bid meeting we were told the sign-in sheets would be posted to the .fbo website. We would request that they be issued this week so that we can contact the subcontractors and suppliers who attended.

Answer: The sign-in sheet was posted to FBO.gov on October 7, 2019.

Question 68: During the pre-bid conference and presentation on October 4, 2019 it was indicated that the Government intends to extend the bid solicitation period until ‘Mid-November’. In an effort to ensure that the government receives the best value and most competitive bids for the subject project, we respectfully request a longer extension to the open solicitation period.

This additional time will afford contractors the opportunity to review the extensive list of project documents to fully understand the requirements of the project and then relay these understandings to our teams, subcontractors, and suppliers. The complexity of this project warrants additional time to explore various approaches to the projects many challenges. Many of the lower tiered subcontractors will be overwhelmed by the extensive document list causing them to not participate in the opportunity, additional time will allow the general contractors to develop bid packages to promote participation by all subs including DBE’s and small businesses. For the reasons noted above, we respectfully request that the response date for the solicitation be postponed until December 12, 2019 and we request that the government responds to this request no later than October 11, 2019 so bidders may react accordingly.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 19.

Question 69: To ensure that there is sufficient time for bidding contractors to review the extensive contract documents and reach a fully competent understanding of the information and restrictions throughout, we respectfully request that the cut-off for pre-bid questions which was provided in Amendment 0001 be extended until 2 weeks prior to the close of solicitation date.

Answer: The due date for questions was extended to October 18, 2019 per Amendment 0002. If there are questions after this date, please submit them. We will do our best to answer them in a timely fashion.

Question 70: Reference Specification Section 03 70 00 Paragraph

1.4.1.1 Aggregate Sources “The government test data from

previous testing and other information on aggregate quality of those sources described in Paragraph MATERIALS are available for review in the District Office.” Also reference Section 03 70 00 Paragraph 2.1.5.5 Commercial Concrete Aggregate Sources “Design documentation containing the results of the Government investigation and test results is available for review in the Huntington District Office.” Contractor is requesting that both of these pieces of information be made available electronically and shared via amendment.

Answer: The requested information has been provided on FBO.gov within the Preliminary Concrete Mixture Proportioning Report.

Question 71: During the pre-bid conference on October 4, 2019 there was a PowerPoint presentation which was used to convey relevant information to those in attendance. Please provide the content of this presentation in electronic format via amendment.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 39.

Question 72: Please confirm that the project site will be available to the Phase 5 awarded contractor at notice to proceed and that all areas of construction (within the work limits and limitations provided in the documents) will be available and that existing plants, falsework, laydown and storage areas, etc.

will be evacuated.

Answer: All areas of the site for construction will NOT be available at Notice to Proceed (NTP). The project work limits are depicted on drawings CS401 thru CS412. The Overall Work Limits are shown on sheets CS401 thru CS404 and are not delineated with the CWL, LWL and RWL. They show only the point numbers. Point tables are sheet CS404. The areas available to the contractor at NTP are delineated on the Contractors Work Limit (CWL) drawings CS405 and CS406. All other areas shall be available per the dates and restrictions shown on the Limited

Work Limit (LWL's) drawings CS407, CS408 and CS409 and on the Restricted Work Limit (RWL's) drawings CS410, CS411 and CS412.

As the construction, laydown and storage areas become available, to the contractor, all plants, assuming "plants" is referring to concrete batch plants, dewatering systems, etc., and falsework will have been removed from these areas. All equipment, tools and materials will have been removed (evacuated) from the areas prior to the areas becoming available to the contractor. Bidders are reminded many areas and access to areas shall be shared with Operations Contractors, present and future, as well as COE Operations personnel during everyday operation of the dam. If the contractor does find any item(s) and/or situations, on site, they feel would hinder construction efforts and schedules, they shall immediately bring it to the attention of the COR.

Question 73: During the pre-bid conference on October 4, 2019 the Government indicated that preliminary mix designs were currently available. Please provide this information in electronic format via amendment.

Answer: See answer to Question No. 21.

Question 74: During the pre-bid conference on October 4, 2019 the Government indicated the possibility that the covers for some of the existing anchors which are scheduled for liftoff testing have leaked water into the anchor recess and that this water may be contaminated. Please see the questions/comments below regarding this statement.

• Please quantify a number of instances where this situation occurs so the bidding contractor can include the appropriate level of effort in their bid. Consider inclusion of a bid item for this purpose.

Answer: Of the 11 anchors tested on the top of the dam, an average of 20 inches of water (low of 8 inches, high of 36 inches) was found in each recess (with anchor cap still installed inside recess). This amount of water had accumulated in these recesses since the anchors were installed prior to 2010. All anchors that were tested on the top of the dam were re-capped and covered using new gaskets, which may or may not affect the amount of water accumulated inside the recesses in the two years since testing. Five of the 11 recesses appeared to be contaminated with grease or the products of the breakdown of grease. It is unknown if the angled anchor recesses on the downstream face will have similar amounts of water or comparable contamination. The report of the 2017 liftoff testing is available for inspection at the Government’s Geotechnical Warehouse.

• Please clarify what contamination may be present and what measures will be required to test the water and then appropriately treat or dispose of this water.

Answer: Potential contaminants are listed in paragraph

1.12.1 of Section 31 68 11 ANCHOR LIFTOFF TESTING. The list has been expanded in Amendment 0003 to also include products of the breakdown of grease. The Contractor shall test and treat the water in accordance with state and Federal regulations, and in accordance with requirements of a licensed commercial disposal facility if the Contractor chooses to use one.

• Please confirm that the Government will sign all manifests as the generator of the contaminated material as it relates to its disposal.

Answer: The Government can sign manifests. If the Contractor requests that the Government sign the manifests, the Contractor will be required to provide documentation that the material has been transferred to a licensed commercial disposal facility for proper disposal.

Question 75: Reference drawing S-030, Note 6. Please clarify what elevation the rock within the stilling basin can be excavated to before completion of the new apron overlay concrete and new anchors.

Answer: As provided in SECTION 00 80 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, Paragraph “CONSTRUCTION RESTRICTIONS” and on Drawing S-030 of Amendment 0003, only rock excavation at M34T2 shall be allowed in the stilling basin prior to constructing and anchoring the new apron overlay and constructing M34T2 to Elevation 1368.0.

Question 76: Reference drawing S-030, Note 7 which describes the connection between the existing right and left training walls and the new monoliths M56T, M57T, M99T2, and M100T2.

Please provide a section view of the joint detail as described in Note 7.

Answer: No section view will be provided for the reconstruction of the training wall face. Details of the existing partial baffle can be found in the “For Information Purposes Only” drawings.

Question 77: During the pre-bid conference on October 4, 2019 the Government indicated that the awarded contractor would be permitted to use the material which is stockpiled to the East of the material laydown yard (North of the existing maintenance building) for fill, earthen cofferdam construction, etc. Is there information available to validate the composition and/or suitability of this material for such purposes?

Answer: See answer to Question No. 223 below.

Question 78: Specification 00 80 00, paragraph 1.9 lists several training requirements for all contractor and subcontractor employees. Please provide anticipated training durations for each training.

Answer: It is anticipated that it will take 3 hours per person for the required training.

Question 79: 00 80 00, Para. 1.24.1.g – does the curtain grouting need to be completed through the entire inspection gallery prior to any concrete placement in the stilling basin?

Or does the curtain grouting for each individual monolith need to be completed prior to concrete placement in the adjacent new monolith?

Answer: Curtain grouting for the spillway (Monoliths 25 through

44) must be completed before concrete placement for any new monoliths.

Question 80: Sheet S-028: are the anchor monoliths mis-numbered as M33, and instead should be M36?

Answer: No. As shown on S-028, 2-9 strand anchors are required in M33.

Question 81: Is there a concrete zoning detail for the spillway apron similar to the zoning details shown on drawings S-048 and S-057?

Answer: No, there is no similar zoning drawing. Reference Concrete Zoning notes on Sheet S-001.

Question 82: The concrete zones shown on drawings S-048 and S- 057 will be difficult to place and may result in quality issues in terms of differential cooling rates. We understand per note 1 on page S-048 that the contractor can propose an alternative following award, however, can the contractor base their estimate on an alternate approach that is more constructible?

Answer: The contractor may base their estimate on whatever approach they choose but no compensation will be paid if the alternate approach is not acceptable to the Government.

Question 83: Is there a requirement for sequencing the tensioning of the anchor bolts by monolith? I.e., do the anchors in monolith 25T need to be tensioned prior to the anchors in monolith 27T?

Answer: No.

Question 84: Please define if there are any work hour or work day restrictions for Contractor’s work and site access and how each of the following excerpts may affect Contractor’s work:

Question 84.a: Specification 01 32 01.00, paragraph 3.12.e.

outlines the time periods of the progress schedule to be 8.0 hr/day, 40 hr/week.

Answer: This not intended to limit the work to 8hr days 40hrs a week.

Question 84.b: Specification 01 50 00, paragraph 1.15.3 outlines dam operations personnel normal work hours of 7:30am to 4:00pm, M-F. Contractor shall have full access to the site provided weather and flow conditions permit.

Answer: This is not intended to limit contractor work hours.

Question 84.c: FAR 52.236-4, paragraph i. Government Operations personnel’s normal work hours are 7:15 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., 5 days per week. The Contractor shall have access to the inside of the dam during the specified normal work hours.

Answer: This is not meant to limit contractor work hours. The clause has been revised by Amendment 0003 to match section 01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES, paragraph 1.15.3.

Question 85: Specification 01 33 00 – where not cited in individual specification sections, how much time should the

Contractor include in its Project Schedule for Government review of submittals?

Answer: Minimum of 30 days.

Question 86: Specification 01 45 00.15 – is the Government providing the Resident Management System? If there is a cost to this, will it be borne by the Government or the contractor?

Answer: The Government will provide a link to the RMS program.

The link listed in section 01 45 00.15 10 RESIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CONTRACTOR MODE (RMS CM), paragraph 1.3 is to the instructions. There is no cost for the program but the contractor will be responsible for the cost of any hardware or software required to implement/run the program.

Question 87: Specification 01 57 20.00, paragraph 1.3.1 states any permits other than the 401 will be the responsibility of the Contractor.

Question 87.a: Please provide a complete list of permits that will be required to be procured by the Contractor along with anticipated procurement times to be assumed for bidding and scheduling purposes.

Answer: (1) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP): The application for the general permit would be completed by the Contractor and signed by the Corps. This application would include but not be limited to any outfalls/discharges in to Waters of the State. Any activities that are not covered under the general construction permit, will need an individual NPDES permit, of which procurement is the responsibility of the contractor. (2) Annual Certification for Large Quantity Water Users from WVDEP Water Use Section. This certification requires annual reporting of water usage including reporting to USACE, Huntington. (3) Registration for all Aboveground Storage Tanks and submittal of spill prevention response plans to WVDEP, if applicable. The Corps will have procured a Clean Water Act Section 401 permit from West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. The contractor will be provided a copy of this permit and shall comply with the terms and conditions of the permit.

Question 87.b: In the event this permit procurement causes a delay in the project schedule outside of Contractor’s control, how will this scenario be treated contractually in terms of time and cost adjustment?

Answer: No additional time will be added to the contract and there will not be any cost adjustment to the contract. The permit procurement process was included in time and schedule considerations, therefore these will not be adjusted for any permit delays.

Question 88: Specification 03 70 00, section 1.4.1.1 and

1.4.1.3 – have these aggregate sources been approved and mix designs developed in previous phases of the project? If so, it would be very advantageous in reducing the schedule and cost if these sources and mix designs are provided for use on this project.

Answer: Some of the aggregate sources have been used on previous projects at Bluestone Dam. Since concrete constituent materials change overtime from any given source, it is necessary to verify the acceptability of proposed concrete constituents prior to use in the project concrete mixtures. Additionally, due to market condition changes, different concrete mixtures will be developed by the Government for use on the subject contract.

Question 89: Since this is temporary works, would the government consider waiving the submittal duration requirements found in the following specifications for the Class 322T tremie concrete?

a. Specification 03 70 00, section SD-03 Product Data, paragraph titled “Contractor Concrete Mixture Proportions” – 90 calendar day minimum

b. Specification 03 70 00, section 1.4.1.1 – 150 calendar day minimum

c…