Portsmouth Seepage Barrier - KTR Questions.docx

Portsmouth Seepage Barrier Questions 09 November 2020

1. Does the 10% Hubzone preference applies to this project?

Yes, this contract includes FAR Clause 52.219-4 (dev) Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concerns.

11 November 2020

2. Could an additional 4 weeks be given to bid this project?

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

3. Could an extension to the bid date of at least eight weeks be given to provide adequate time to respond to the request for proposals?

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

4. Regarding the Small Business Participation Plan, there is a table of percentages listed on page 28 of the solicitation. Are the percentages listed in this table based on the total value of works subcontracted on the project? If not, please clarify what these percentages are based on.

The percentages are of the total dollars to be subcontracted. These percentages are the minimum statutory limits which contractors must adhere to. So if subcontracting $100,000, then $23,000 should go to overall SB, $5,000 each to SDB and WOSB, and $3,000 each to SDVOSB, VOSB & HUBZone. The remaining required subcontracting amount can be set aside, or used to subcontracting other than small business subcontractors.

5. On page 32 and 33 of the solicitation, the table references a 10% small business goal. Please clarify what this refers to.

Minimum stated should be 23% instead of 10%. This will be corrected in an amendment.

6. References to APPENDIX A – GEOTECHNICAL DATA are made throughout the documents. When will this be provided? And will it contain rock testing data including UCS values?

Appendix A will be provided to contractors. Additionally, soil samples are available for Contractor perusal at request. Please coordinate with the RFP contacts for a date and time. UCS data was not collected as part of USACE explorations program, thus will not be provided. Rock testing may be completed and included in the unit cost of the seepage barrier.

7. Specification Section 31 56 00 - Seepage Barrier Construction 3.2 states “The approximate top of bedrock is shown on the drawings and was encountered between elevation 455 and 457ft (NAV88). The terminal elevation of the proposed seepage barrier shall be no greater than elevation 450ft (NAVD88) to ensure an adequate key into rock is obtained.” Does this mean the barrier must extend to at least EL 450ft, even if rock is encountered higher than EL. 455ft?

If rock is encountered above elevation 455 ft., the contractor may terminate the seepage barrier above elevation 450 feet, if and only if the following two conditions are met:

a. The top of rock elevation is shown with evidence (i.e. pilot borings or otherwise observing top of rock elevation) to be above elevation 455 feet.

b. Five-foot embedment into the bedrock is completed.

c. Otherwise, the seepage barrier shall terminate at elevation 450 feet.

17 November 2020

8. Due to the size and complexity of the proposal submission and the upcoming holidays, we request a bid extension of 2 months.

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

9. The past experience in the factor 2 experience section asks for projects completed within the past 10 years; however, the evaluation criteria section asks for project experience of projects completed within the past 6 years. Limiting the experience to 6 years would exclude certain techniques. Please confirm that relevant experience listed within the past 10 years will be acceptable.

Yes, experience within the past 10 years will be evaluated.

10. Project experience seepage barrier depth requested in excess of 80 feet; however, under the qualifications of the seepage barrier equipment operator it asks for depths of 125 feet. 125-ft depth would exclude certain techniques. Please confirm that project experience with depths greater than 80 feet will satisfy this requirement.

Concur, it should be 80 feet or more in depth.

11. Is there any UCS information for the rock for the 5-ft embedment requested? This information is of high importance to help decide what type of equipment can be used. What is the UCS for the top 5-ft of rock?

There is currently no UCS testing data available for the rock. The rock from select sonic borings in the CD-19 series is available for inspection in Huntington, WV upon request. The rock may be tested as part of the unit cost for seepage barrier construction.

12. Is there any bore hole information for the Borrow Area “A” at the west end of the levee?

Yes, it is included in appendix A to the specifications which was inadvertently not provided. Appendix A – K will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation.

18 November 2020

13. In connection with above solicitation, kindly let us know the value of the bid bond (or % of the bid amount).

This is not a bid and therefore a bid bond is not required. Performance and Payment Bonds are required after award. See FAR Clause 52.228-15 (Dev) Performance and Payment Bonds -Construction.

19 November 2020

14. Due to the magnitude and scope of this project, please provide a bid extension of 8 weeks.

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

15. Referencing Spec Section 400513 3.2 Temporary Pumping, PHASE 1 – while the maximum pumping capacity needing to be set up is identified, there is no way for the contractors to know the actual volume of flow needing to be bypassed during Phase 1 since this will be based completely on weather conditions during construction activities. If heavy rains are encountered, some or all of the installed bypass pumps will be operated. However, if dry conditions exist, minimal bypass will be needed to maintain the WWTP effluent. We recommend providing an allowance for contractors to use which would cover fuel consumption and operator staffing during this Phase of the work.

Responses to 15 & 16 are combined under 16.

16. Referencing Spec Section 400513 3.2 Temporary Pumping, PHASE 2 – while the maximum pumping capacity needing to be set up is identified, there is no way for the contractors to know the duration or volume of pumping needed for Phase 2 since this will be based completely on weather conditions and the level of the Ohio River during construction activities. If river levels are normal, the bypass pumps will not need to be operated. But if river levels are high, some or all of the bypass pumps may need to be running. We recommend providing an allowance for contractors to use which would cover fuel consumption and operator staffing during this Phase of the work.

Since the duration of bypass pumping is dependent on the contractor’s proposed construction methods, the contractor shall determine the proposed duration of both bypass pumping phases in days. The contractor may assume the following: Phase 1, Pumping operation will be actively staffed/operated 100% of the phase 1 duration at an assumed average flow of 10,000 gpm (14.4 mgd); Phase 2, Pumping operation will be actively staffed/operated only when the sluice gate in the gate well is closed due to Ohio River flooding, which may be assumed to be 1/4 of the duration of phase 2. The assumed average flow of 10,000 gpm (14.4mgd) shall be assumed during active pumping operation.

The contractor shall provide a "lump sum" or "job" bid for the line item "temporary bypass pumping" based on the contractor proposed durations and the assumptions listed above.

As a part of the proposal, the contractor shall submit a schedule of values/schedule of pay activities with the following recommended minimum break out:

· Mobilization

· Phase 1 fixed costs (stand-by or active)

· Phase 1 operating incremental costs

· Phase 2 fixed costs (stand-by or active)

· Phase 2 active pumping fixed costs (fixed costs of active pumping operation independent of volume pumped)

· Phase 2 operating incremental costs

· Demobilization.

Contractor shall include schedule of values in the PRICE PROPOSAL, not the TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

17. Are any backup or standby pumps required in the temporary pumping phases listed in 400513 3.2?

No, however, if pumps break down during operations, the contractor is expected to repair or replace faulty equipment within a reasonable timeframe of 48 hours.

18. Sheet CD103 notes the presence of lead paint on the anti-siphon valve enclosures. Do the existing pipe couplings have lead paint present?

Yes, sampling of the couplings determined that they had lead-based paint present at 4,400 µg/g, or 4,400 parts per million (ppm); this is over the regulatory level of 5 ppm for disposal. Representative samples of the lead-based paint should be taken and analyzed to determine if they fail the TCLP level of 5 ppm for disposal as a hazardous waste. A copy of the Phase I ESA will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation.

19. Sheets CD102 & CD103 notes the presence of asbestos on the existing pipes. From the site visits, it is evident that much of the coating on these pipes has flaked off. Will any of the soils around and between the pipelines need to be treated as contaminated?

The State of Ohio does not regulate metal pipe with asbestos covering, however this shall be confirmed by the contractor. If the contractor disturbs the pipe by cutting or grinding, the asbestos debris has to be contained and properly disposed. It is our assumption that the missing pieces of asbestos likely found their way to the ground, in the wind, or could have been further disturbed by mowing and weed-eating around and under the pipes over years. It is our opinion that the amount would be inconsequential given the number of years this has occurred. It will be the contractor’s responsibility to check with the state regulators or take a soil sample and have it tested. A copy of the Phase I ESA will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation.

20. What should we assume for water supply and quality? If the Ohio River, Lawson’s Run or existing relief wells do not meet quality or quantity requirements, buying the volume of water required for this project would be a significant additional expense. Is any quality data for these sources available?

The water quality of the Ohio River is variable based on recent precipitation and time of year. The water quality in Lawson’s Run during dry weather flows is reasonably low in contaminants, since most of it is effluent from the wastewater treatment plant. During wet weather flows, the WWTP effluent is mixed with urban storm runoff making the water quality highly variable. Water quality reports from the water treatment plant will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation. These include daily raw water parameters of the Ohio River including turbidity, pH, alkalinity, hardness and other information. Also, wastewater treatment plant discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation. These DMRs indicate discharge water quality parameters from the WWTP.

21. Please confirm that Subfactor IB is meant to be Seepage Barrier – Quality Control and Verification and not IA and that Subfactors should be re-numbered as follows:

Subfactor IB is meant to be Seepage Barrier – Quality Control and Verification and not IA. This will be corrected in an amendment.

22. Will the USACE accept a Value Engineered alternate to the belled pier foundations shown for the discharge pipe foundations?

USACE is willing to evaluate a Value Engineered alternative after award, however, the design shall be bid as currently proposed. Any future Value Engineered alternative must, at a minimum, be feasible, within the scope of work, structurally capable of withstanding applied loads and have good presentation. Also, VE proposals must not introduce additional risks to the levee integrity (ie. High pressure fluids, potential to create voids, fracture of impermeable levee core…etc.)

23. Please confirm a Project Labor Agreement will not be required if the contractor is signatory to the relevant unions in the area.

See FAR Clause 52.222-34 Project Labor Agreement for details.

24. Please confirm it is the discretion of the contractor on which side (land side vs water side) of the dam a backfilled platform extension is installed (subject to the Contractor’s Work Limits in the drawings).

This is a correct assumption. The contractor may propose placing fill for a platform on the land side, river side or both, subject to the Contractor Work Limits.

25. Specification Section 31 55 00, page 6 3.1 References "soil design parameters used by USACE Huntington District for prior stability analyses are included in Appendix A - Geotechnical Data of these specifications." The soil design parameters are not included in the current specifications. Please provide this stability analysis and soil design parameters.

Appendix A will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation.

26. The drawings show the levee has subsided from its original elevation of 548.2-ft. Does this mean that the contractor is responsible for protecting the entire levee after Notice to Proceed to elevation 548.2-ft during a flood event, even if one occurs prior to work platform construction and cutoff wall construction?

The contractor will only be required to protect to elevation 548.2 in the areas that the contractor has excavated more than 6 inches from the existing grade. This is to allow the contractor to strip topsoil prior to excavation of the levee, however this assumes the contractor will not leave the levee stripped for an extended duration of greater than 2 weeks, prior to excavating. Portions of the levee that are not excavated or disturbed will not be the contractor’s responsibility to protect to elevation 548.2.

20 November 2020

27. Is USACE willing to waive the AISC certifications required for the access platform if we have a certified independent 3rd party testing company?

No. AISC certifications are required.

28. Are we to assume all existing 36” pipe we are to connect to is in sound and acceptable condition?

Yes. The existing pipe shall be assumed to be sound and acceptable condition, however, some deformation may be expected which may make the connections to the existing pipe more difficult. This shall be accounted for by the contractor.

29. Please confirm we are to install the 18” HDPE drainage line per specification 33 40 00 Storm Drainage Utilities and NOT 33 11 00 Water Distribution

Correct. The 18” storm sewer shall be installed per 33 40 00.

30. Does USACE have a preferred location for jobsite trailers?

No specific location is preferred. The office is to be sized and located as indicated within the specifications.

31. Is there available power and water connections for the jobsite trailers in the general area?

Yes. Both single phase and 3 phase power is available at the site and is shown on the plans. Existing waterlines are shown on the plans. A temporary waterline and/or service extension may be necessary depending on where the contractor proposes to place jobsite trailers. It will be the contractor’s responsibility to coordinate this.

32. Has there been testing in the general area of the 3 discharge pipes to ensure there are no environmental contaminants from the existing pipes and valves that contain lead and or ACM?

No. There was no visible evidence of soil contamination, so soil was not tested.

33. Is this project classified?

This project is not classified.

34. Will we need NDA's and keep the drawings and spec’s Locked up?

No, this will not be required.

35. Section 31 00 00 Sub-Section 3.23.5 calls for a Proctor test for every 50 cy of material stockpiled or in place source material. Do you want a Proctor every two truckloads as stated in the specs at $200/proctor? Normally a Proctor is taken every change in material or every 5000 or 10000 cy. to meet standard construction practices.

This will be revised to require testing every 10,000 CY or change in material.

36. Section 31 32 23 Sub-Sections 1.4,2.1.7, 3.1.3, 3.2, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.5, 3.3.3, 3.3.5.1, 3.3.7, 3.3.8.1, 3.3.8.5 have brackets for quantities and percentages that are left blank. Please advise.

Replace project specs with specs provided in amendment.

37. Section 31 55 00 Sub-Section 3.4.2 Will we be paid for stored material for flood control even if it is never used?

31 55 00 Sub-Section 3.4.2 only addresses payment in connection with evacuation and remobilization of the work platform due to a flood event. Per sub-section 3.3.2, the construction platform shall be evacuated, and the flood contingency plan implemented if the river level is projected to reach within 5 feet of the surface of the construction platform within 72 hours. Payment for evacuation of work platform will only be paid, if the work platform must be evacuated and the temporary flood protection measures “closed up” to fully protect from flooding.

Temporary flood protection, however, per sub-section 3.3.2 shall be required at all times while the levee has been lowered. Temporary flood protection measures is required to be in place at all times, except for a maximum opening of 500 lineal feet maximum. These temporary flood protection measures shall be paid for as a part of the lump sum price for “Site Work” per sub-section 3.4.

38. What is the Unconfined Compressive Strength of Bedrock to be excavated for the cutoff wall?

There is currently no UCS testing data available for the rock. The rock from select sonic borings in the CD-19 series is available for inspection in Huntington, WV upon request. The rock may be tested as part of the unit cost for seepage barrier construction.

39. What is the load for the drilled piers/foundations needed for the discharge pipes?

Factored Loads on Foundations:

Foundation/Pipe Support 1:

Total - 37.13 Kips Pipe 1 Point Load - 12.38 Kips Pipe 2 Point Load - 12.38 Kips Pipe 3 Point Load - 12.38 Kips

Foundation/Pipe Support 2:

Total: 38.22 Kips Pipe 1 Point Load - 12.65 Kips Pipe 2 Point Load - 12.65 Kips Pipe 3 Point Load - 12.92 Kips

Foundation/Pipe Support 3:

Total: 74.66 Kips Beam/Platform Point Load 1 - 15.09 Kips Beam/Platform Point Load 2 - 15.09 Kips Pipe 1 Point Load - 14.83 Kips Pipe 2 Point Load - 14.83 Kips Pipe 3 Point Load - 14.83 Kips

Foundation/Pipe Support 4:

Total: 65.74 Kips Beam/Platform Point Load 1 - 15.09 Kips Beam/Platform Point Load 2 - 15.09 Kips Pipe 1 Point Load - 11.52 Kips Pipe 2 Point Load - 11.85 Kips Pipe 3 Point Load - 12.18 Kips

40. While the USACE evaluate the demonstration area and results, can the seepage barrier wall work continue, or should it be assumed no work take place until after the review?

No work on the seepage barrier, beyond the demonstration section, may proceed until all demonstration section evaluation is completed.

41. Due to the complexity of the project would the government consider a two-week extension of the due date of proposal responses to December 21, 2020?

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

42. Specification 31 56 00 Seepage Barrier Construction and the provided jobsite borings reference Bedrock descriptions and RQD information. We request any additional rock testing (UCS, etc.) or data that is available.

There is currently no UCS testing data available for the rock. The rock from select sonic borings in the CD-19 series is available for inspection in Huntington, WV upon request. The rock may be tested as part of the unit cost for seepage barrier construction.

43. In consideration that the Seepage Barrier main scope is to provide a hydraulic barrier and there is no risk of artesian pressure that could develop an erosion phenomenon; we request the 10-point moving average of UCS to be reduced from 350 psi to 250 psi and the minimum UCS from 250 psi to 200 psi to broaden the implementation of diverse technologies.

The strength requirement was selected for the ability to core the seepage barrier after install. Past case studies have shown that lower strength barriers are more likely to have a lower RQD, and to be damaged by gravels within the core. The higher strength was also chosen to reduce the risk of erosion in points where the barrier maybe damaged or defective. The minimum UCS will be reduced to 200 psi, and the 10 point moving average will be revised to 250 psi. It is noted that all performance criteria and testing requirements must be met, and the minimum strength may be revised if the ability to achieve these requirements is not met (i.e. satisfactory core samples.)

44. Can the question period of 11/20/20 be extended?

The cut-off for submission of questions will be adjusted to allow ample time for Contractors to digest any changes resulting from forthcoming amendments.

45. Can the response date of 12/7/20 be extended?

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

46. Are there any specific noise or work hours restrictions?

There are no specific noise or work hour restrictions, however there are qualitative noise restrictions per 01 57 20 sub-section 3.10.

47. Are there options for increasing the max panel length of 20 ft?

The maximum panel length will be increased to 30 feet.

48. Can the Pre-bid attendee list be provided?

List of attendees will be attached to the posted questions and answers.

49. There are quantities in the bid proposal for asphalt paving but there is no typical section. Can a typical pavement section be provided?

Pavement replacement detail and pavement planning and overlay details are located on CS510 in the plan set.

50. The solicitation on beta.sam is listed as a "presolicitation". Is this the correct solicitation page for the project or is there a different page marked as solicitation?

The project is listed on beta.sam originally as a presolicitation. The package (which includes the solicitation) is built off that. The attachments include plans, specs and solicitation, as well as any amendments.

51. It seems the solicitation does not have a due date. Is the response date on beta.sam of December 7th at 4:30pm correct?

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

52. Please extend the deadline for questions by a minimum of two weeks.

The cut-off for submission of questions will be adjusted to allow ample time for Contractors to digest any changes resulting from forthcoming amendments.

53. Please extend the proposal due date by a minimum of 4 weeks to allow us to provide a comprehensive and competitive proposal.

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

54. Please provide a Measurement and Payment section that outlines how each of the CLIN’s will be measured and paid for.

Please refer to paragraph 2.1 of section 01 22 00.00 20 APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT. Additional details for measurement and payment is included in each spec section.

55. Drawing CS100 shows a proposed Slurry disposal area adjacent to Williams Street, please confirm if any additional permitting is required if we dispose of our slurry in this area?

No additional permitting is required.

56. Specification section 31 56 00 paragraph 3.5 limits the maximum open trench/panel length to 20 feet we request this dimension be extended to 26 feet.

This specification will be revised to allow up to 30 feet of trench to be open at a time.

57. Specification section 31 56 00 paragraph 1.4.e requires a minimum average unconfined compressive strength of 350 psi at twenty-eight days as measured by a moving 10-point average. From the site visit, we understand this is partially driven by concerns regarding the coring of low-strength material. We are currently engaged in four contracts with USACE requiring UCS’s as low as 50 psi that we have successfully cored. If this is the driving factor for the higher strength requirement, please consider reducing the required strength.

The strength requirement was selected for the ability to core the seepage barrier after install. Past case studies have shown that lower strength barriers are more likely to have a lower RQD, and to be damaged by gravels within the core. The higher strength was also chosen to reduce the risk of erosion in points where the barrier maybe damaged or defective. The minimum UCS will remain at 250 psi, and the 10 point moving average will be revised to 300 psi.

58. If the contractor’s methods require the use of a guide wall, can the guide wall be left in place following cutoff wall installation?

The end of construction condition must be consistent with impervious material consistent with the materials specifications for the seepage barrier or the impervious cap (31 00 00 paragraph 2.2) to the full level of protection. If the guide wall is in compliance with these specifications, then it may be left in place. Structural steel will be allowed as part of the guide wall, if the guide wall is to be left in place. It is noted that the guide wall must not be a safety or aesthetic impediment post-construction.

59. Volume one of the proposals will include the small business and subcontracting plans, however, these will include dollar amounts and it is noted in section 00 21 16 Instructions to proposers that dollar amounts shall not be included in this volume. Please advise.

The contractor should include the dollar amount that they believe they will use subcontractors for (both large and small), and then they use that number to apply the percentages. They are not giving away their price by doing that, just the total dollars anticipated to be subcontracted.

60. Section 00 21 00 includes FAR clause 52.222-33 which calls for a project labor agreement as defined in the solicitation Clause Entitled “Project Labor Agreement”. This clause does not exist in the solicitation; therefore, no Project Labor Agreement is required. Please confirm.

See FAR Clause 52.222-34 Project Labor Agreement for details in section 00 70 00. The Small Business Participation Plan reflects the need for percentage of participation only. Dollar values are not required for each small business.

61. Section 01 31 19.00 Item 3.1.1 notes that a list of partnering facilitators can be provided by the contracting officer. Please provide this list.

This information will be provided after award. The names are not needed prior to award. Only the awardee will need this information.

62. It was noted during the site visit that we are able to dam the 7’ x 7’ Lawson’s Run Concrete box culvert on the riverside, it is not clear from the plans how we accomplish this. Is there an existing weir that can be installed and if so, do you have a detail that shows the location it is installed?

There is an existing sluice gate in the gate well structure shown on the plans. The sluice gate details are included in the FIO record drawings at the end of the plan set. Otherwise, the contractor could propose other means of stopping flow from the river (ie. Sand bags, temporary dam within the existing culvert…etc.)

63. Drawing CS405 shows large areas requiring restoration of 8” of gravel. Many of the areas identified are not currently gravel and will require the import of a significant volume of gravel. This item is also not a CLIN line item. How or where will this material and its placement be quantified and paid for by the government?

The areas identified, although they may not appear to be gravel, are gravel with some surface vegetation. These areas were determined by recent aerial photos as well as site investigation. To eliminate confusion, we have delineated the limits of required “aggregate surface course” as per 32 01 00 sub-section 3.6. All “aggregate surface course” shall be paid per “site work” (sub-section 3.18.15) included in the lump sum. It may be assumed that the contractor must place the entire depth of material to be confirmed by load tickets. If, during construction, it is determined that the entire quantity of gravel will be required, a reduction may be approved by the COR based on the contractor’s unit cost per the approved schedule of values / schedule of pay activities.

64. Have there been any existing condition surveys of 7’ x 7’ Lawson’s Run Concrete box culvert, and if so, can they be provided?

A base level condition survey was completed in July 2019. Photos and Video will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation. The condition of the box culvert is good despite its age with minimal joint offsets and damage. There has been no seepage around or into the conduit noted. Culvert inspection videos will also be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation.

65. Please provide the CAD files for all the drawings.

MicroStation base drawing files, only, will be provided with an addendum for contractors use to prepare proposals. The files will include work limits, existing topographic information, existing utilities and features, proposed seepage barrier alignment as well as some additional information.

66. Please provide the Slope Stability Analysis for the levee.

Printouts of the Slope Stability Analysis are included in Appendix A which will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation. However, it is noted that the contractor is responsible for the stability of the work platform (Section 31 00 00 paragraph 3.1 and Section 31 55 00). The original slope stability calculations and assumptions for the levee were completed in the 1940’s and are not available. The current analyses included in the appendix are based on recent borings and testing data, as well as soil type correlations.

67. Pages 62, 63 and 64 of the Solicitation document reference FAR clause 52.228-14 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT. Please confirm that neither a bid bond nor an irrevocable letter of credit is required.

This clause allows a contractor to use this in place of a performance bond when a contractor is unable to get bonding.

68. In deference to Section 31 55 00 Paragraph 1.4 SD-02 we request the contractor be allowed to keep an unlimited section of the levee at the lowered elevation as long as it can demonstrate its ability to deploy the flood contingency plan within the time prescribed.

Request denied. The flood protection shall be installed per the plans and specifications.

69. It was mentioned that the trees will be removed by another contractor ahead of the start of this project. Will we be responsible for removing the stump? What if any portion of tree removal will the seepage remediation contractor be responsible for?

Trees and vegetation will be removed to within 8 inches of the ground surface. All grubbing and stump removal necessary will be the contractor’s responsibility.

70. Can the bid date be extended to allow us more time to prepare our proposal?

As indicated on beta.sam the RFP due date has been moved to Jan 12, 2021 at 4:30 pm.

71. Can the good clay material that is in the baseball fields be used to build the work platform then once the work platform is to be removed use that material to build the levee back up to finished grade?

Yes, as long as it has not been contaminated with organics, sand & gravel or vegetation. It will be the contractor’s responsibility to ensure the material used complies with the specification for satisfactory fine grained material.

72. Section 31 56 00 paragraph 3.10 calls for verification coring, drilling, sampling and testing per section 31 57 00 for acceptance of the seepage barrier. The purpose is to demonstrate continuity and homogeneity, permeability and strength. The core drilling is to be done in accordance with ASTM D2113 developed for rock core drilling. Hardened cementitous seepage barrier are made of material with mechanical properties very different from the ones of rock and to our knowledge no ASTM procedure has been yet developed for successfully coring cementitous seepage barriers without damaging the cutoff wall or the cores. As a matter of fact, our experience demonstrates that coring of narrow cutoff wall induces microfissuration of cores as well as of the adjacent section of the cutoff. It has been well established that coring, in situ and laboratory testing will not allow to determine the in-situ permeability of the barrier, nor will it allow to obtain cores of sufficient quality to verify that the permeability and UCS specified are met. We agree that such coring will allow to determine the continuity and homogeneity of the seepage barrier. Please clarify that this verification coring will be used for verifying the continuity and homogeneity of the cutoff and that the results of the in-situ and laboratory testing will not be used for the acceptance of the seepage barrier.

The verification coring will be used for verifying the continuity and homogeneity of the seepage barrier. Likewise, the verification coring, in-situ, and laboratory testing will be used for acceptance of the seepage barrier. The increased strengths of the seepage barrier is in part to reduce the risk due to microfissures and to improve the ability to core for verification. The Contractor may propose alternative acceptance measures to be approved by the COR with enough evidence/case studies. However, the Contractor should be prepared to perform the contract in accordance with Specifications as written.

73. SS 31 56 00 paragraph 3.9.1 mentions that “Six samples shall be collected for testing permeability and six samples shall be collected for testing compressive strength.”. Further, this same section is as follow: “half of the test specimens shall be tested for hydraulic conductivity (permeability) and half shall be tested for unconfined compressive strength.”. We understand from this paragraph that three (3) samples shall be tested for permeability and UCS. This is further contradicted in paragraph 3.9.2.1 & 3.9.2.2. Please confirm if the Contractor shall perform three (3) or six (6) unconfined compressive strength and hydraulic permeability per bulk sample.

Per bulk sample, there will be 12 test specimens (SS 31 56 00, Paragraph 3.9.1). Of those 12 test specimens, half (being 6 of the 12) will undergo unconfined compressive strength testing, and the remaining 6 will undergo permeability testing.

74. SS 31 56 00 paragraph 1.6.1 requires the Seepage Barrier Equipment Operator to have the minimum following experience: “a minimum of two projects of depths greater than 125 feet, and two projects with minimum length of 1000 feet using equipment and techniques similar to that being used for this contract.” This experience requirement is relevant to the installation of the seepage barrier by soil-mix method or excavation with clamshell but is not relevant for excavation with hydraulic excavator as we are not aware of any excavator capable of reaching this depth. As this project is within reach of specialized long reach excavator, we propose to add the following to the requirement: “If the excavation is performed with a long reach excavator, the experience of the Excavator Operator shall include a minimum of two projects with depths greater than 90 ft, and two projects with minimum length of 1,000 ft.

This paragraph will be revised to state “a minimum of two projects of depths greater than 80 feet, and two projects with minimum length of 1000 feet using equipment and techniques similar to that being used for this contract.” This is in accordance with project experience for the initial proposal.

75. Please provide the design loads to be considered for the belled piers that will be the new pipe supports shown on Drawing S-101 (among others).

See response to question 39.

76. We are a certified woman owned business however what is the criteria for the small business as called out in the documents. Is that a certification or just a size of company you qualify for?

The SAM registration of each company shall state based of NAICS code what the business is certified as.

77. Do you know most generally what data management system most contractors use for your projects?

Resident Management System (RMS) is required to be used for this contract.

1 December 2020

78. 31 56 00 Table 1 notes that this is an example QC testing matrix notes under the table specifically note 2 and 4 requirements to test the bentonite slurry and test for cement content of verification core samples.

a. Could you confirm if these testing requirements are mandatory or just examples of the type of QC to be done?

Table 1 is an example QC plan. The QC plan to be used during construction will be proposed and approved as a part of the Seepage Barrier Construction Plan submittal.

b. If mandatory; is the determination of cement content required for each core sample selected for UCS?

Not mandatory.

c. Is there any minimum cement content requirement to be met?

There is not a set minimum cement content requirement. It is dependent on the methods employed.

79. 31 57 00 3.4.2 and 3.5 Requires tests to be signed and sealed by an Ohio PE.

a. Would the USACE allow a Registered Professional Engineer from any state to sign and seal?

A Registered Professional Engineer from any state may sign and seal.

4 December 2020

80. FAR 52.222-33 is included in this contract. Per Line "(e) The offeror shall submit to the Contracting Officer a copy of the project labor agreement with its offer." FAR 52.222-33 has an Alternate 1 and Alternate 2 that would replace line (e) with language that would allow the contractor to negotiate a PLA prior to award of the contract rather than prior to offer. Can Alternate 1 be included in this contract?

This is being corrected in the amendment. 52.222-33 Alt 1 is replacing 52.222-33.

81. C.J. Mahan plans to participate in this procurement as a subcontractor in a supporting role to prime contractor seepage barrier specialists. To facilitate preliminary design and takeoff of site work and work platform quantities, would you please post ACAD drawings for the site grading. We are primarily interested in existing and finished grade contours.

MicroStation files will be provided on beta.sam to assist with proposal preparation.

82. SECTION 31 55 00, Sub-section 3.3.1 states:

“If a flood event is predicted to result in pool elevations which will be within 5 feet, vertically of the work platform surface, the Contracting Officer will notify the Contractor within 24 hours of the time the Ohio River is predicted to reach an elevation 5 feet below the work platform. The Contractor will be directed to stop work and evacuate all personnel …”

The sentence seems to conflict with Subsections 1.4 SUBMITTALS and 3.3.2 Temporary Flood Protection, which respectively require:

“The plan shall indicate that the construction platform shall be evacuated, and the flood contingency plan implemented if the river level is projected to reach within 5 feet of the surface of the construction platform within 72 hours.”

“The construction platform shall be evacuated, and the flood contingency plan implemented if the river level is projected to reach within 5 feet of the surface of the construction platform within 72 hours.”

Contractor shall be required to evacuate the construction platform if the river level is projected to reach within 5 feet of the surface of the construction platform within 24 hours. Conflicting indications will be revised.

83. 3.14.2 Seepage Barrier Critical Area Demonstration Section Payment for construction of seepage barrier placed in the area defined as the "Critical Section Demonstration Section" shall be paid at the contract line item price per square foot for "Seepage Barrier Critical Demonstration Section". Payment will be based on acceptable construction completed in accordance with the drawings and these specifications. Payment shall include all equipment, materials, labor, and supplies necessary to perform the work described in these specifications. Payment shall include all costs incidental to: development of mixes; mixing, testing, and placing of seepage barrier materials; disposal of unused excavated material in the borrow/spoil area; disposal of waste materials; inflow and outflow measurement; cleaning of element joints and excavation bottoms; material testing; providing access for Government personnel to observe readouts of all instrumentation used to monitor equipment during construction of all barrier elements for quality assurance purposes, excavation alignment monitoring data to determine as-built configurations in three dimensions (in both electronic and hardcopy form); and instrument monitoring and maintenance including sensor and readout equipment items, reading and evaluation of instrument data, inspection; maintaining records; and generating reports related to the data collection/construction.

In what Clin we shall consider the Box Culvert preparatory and restauration works. How would this work be measured for payment?

Payment for item “Seepage Barrier Critical Area” has been changed from sq. ft. to job. Also, language has been added to 3.14.2 to include preparation and restoration of the culvert. It is recommended that contractor provide a schedule of values/pay activities for “Seepage Barrier Critical Area” with the proposal.

84. 33.12.1 Temporary Bypass Pumping Payment for all costs in connection with installation of temporary bypass pumping, shall be made at the contract line item price for "Temporary Bypass Pumping," which price shall include full compensation for furnishing, testing, maintaining, all labor, materials, and equipment required to complete the work as specified in Paragraph TEMPORARY PUMPING.

Considering riprap / geotextile for the bypass have separate CLINs, and that there is a separate payment CLIN for site works, clarify in what CLIN we should allocate and measure for payment the costs for the earthworks (preparatory works and restauration work, i.e. import soil and stone material, cut, fill, grading, and disposal) required for the bypass pool and impoundment?

The riprap and geotextile for the bypass, as shown on the plans, is a conceptual design that, if implemented by the contractor, should be itemized in the schedule of values for “TEMPORARY PUMPING”. However, the contractor may propose a different energy dissipation device at the outlet that does not include riprap or geotextile. All items that are a part of the contractor’s proposed “TEMPORARY PUMPING PLAN”, including any excavation and restoration, shall be included on the schedule of values for “TEMPORARY PUMPING” and not on any other CLIN.

85. 3.18.8 ODOT Riprap Type C The quantity of ODOT Type C riprap to be paid for will be computed by the cubic yard, based on the theoretical thickness specified or shown on the drawings, and the actual area over which acceptable placement is made. Payment for ODOT Type C riprap will be made at the contract line item price per cubic yard for "ODOT Riprap, Type C", which price shall include all costs of furnishing, hauling, handling, and placing the riprap as shown on the drawings and as specified, and tests for quality control. 3.18.9 ODOT Riprap Type D The quantity of ODOT Type D riprap to be paid for will be computed by the cubic yard, based on the theoretical thickness specified or shown on the drawings, and the actual area over which acceptable placement is made. Payment for ODOT Type D riprap will be made at the contract line item price Seepage Barrier for Portsmouth, OH PORT01 SECTION 32 01 00 Page 11 per cubic yard for "ODOT Riprap, Type D", which price shall include all costs of furnishing, hauling, handling, and placing the riprap as shown on the drawings and as specified, and tests for quality control.

In what Clin we shall consider removal and how will this work be measured for payment?

All removal/demolition shall be measured and paid for under item 37 SITE WORK. As a part of item 37 SITE WORK, the contractor shall include a schedule of values/pay activities. Any items not already accounted for in the “Item 37 Price Breakout Schedule” may be inserted by the contractor and included in the total for item 37. Blank lines will be provided on the “Price Breakout Schedule” for additional contractor input.

Pre-Proposal Meeting Participants