FY20 LRAFB FuT AM0003 Bidder Inquiries-Replies.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED\\FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Bid Inquiry Contractor Report All Inquiries

Project: C130 H/J Fuselage Trainer Facility, LRAFB Review: LRAFB Fuselage Trainer Facility (W9127S-20-R- 6011) (00001) (sorted by CommentID ) Displaying 207 inquiries.

Id Discipline Sheet Detail Spec 8586626 Contracting SECTION 00 22 10 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Section 00 22010, Volume II, 9.1 Submission Requirements says, "examples shall be of similar size and complexity to the aircraft hangar facility as proposed in this project". The project Contract Cost Ceiling is $43.8M. Given that the project includes repetitive elements, it would seem appropriate to consider smaller projects that have elements of similar size and complexity. Consider stating that projects in the $10M - $15M range as relevant with perhaps at least one example of similar overall size to demonstrate capability of handling a large project.

On: May 19 2020.

Government Response. . The Government will considerer all relevant aircraft hanger facility experience submitted. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8586681 General Due Date Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

The current proposal Due Date does not allow for sufficient time to put together a design-build proposal. Would USACE please provide a two week extension?

On: May 19 2020.

Government Response. . The Government will take into consideration but do not rely on it until it is formalized in a solicitation amendment as the due date may not be extended. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8586923 Construction Management base access requirements

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

In the Solicitation, a REAL ID is required for the pre-proposal site visit. If we have not been able to get the REAL ID due to COVID 19, can we use a passport instead?

On: May 19 2020.

Government Response. . The enforcement of REAL ID Act compliant DLs and IDs has been pushed to 1 Oct 21 by Executive Order. Anyone will be good for base entry w/out REAL ID Act compliant credentials.

On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8587610 General 9 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

For the pre-proposal site visit, can you clarify where the COVID-19 hotspots are located.

On: May 19 2020.

Government Response. . Refer to:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

Page 1 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

6/10/2020https://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=BicPublicReportAl...

8587862 General N/A N/A N/A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Referencing requirements specify to list relevant aircraft hangar or similar facility. Would a maintenance hanger be acceptable to the list?

On: May 19 2020.

Government Response. . An aircraft maintenance hanger would be acceptable. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8588941 Architectural Roof Plan Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Will USACE please provide the facility's Roof Plan?

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The RFP provides conceptual plans sufficient to identify the Government's requirements. A concept for the roof can be identified by the conceptual elevations on sheet A-200. On:

May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590381 Civil A101 and A402 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawings A 101 and A 402 indicate exterior access double doors serving the Aircraft Power (176) and Aircraft Parts Storage (179) rooms. As currently proposed, access to these rooms would need to be accomplished over a sodded/landscaped surface subject to direct downspout runoff. Vehicle transit over the grassed surface to the rooms is further hampered by the available space between mechanical enclosures and the top-of-slope (approximately 9' wide), and the presence of 5'-long downspouts with 4'-long riprap outlets. No vehicular access to these rooms is indicated within the RFP Drawings. Please clarify whether a dedicated vehicular way needs to be provided to service these rooms.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . No dedicated vehicular way is to be added. Vehicle access to Aircraft Power

(176) and Aircraft Parts Storage (179) is thought to be very limited. The size and orientation of the mechanical enclosures will be determined by the Designer of Record. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590386 Civil A100 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing A 100 indicates several double door access points on the south side of H-Trainer Bays and on the east side of the J-Trainer Bays. The provision of double doors would presumably indicate the requirement to accommodate the vehicular transit of heavier and/or larger equipment in addition to personnel ingress/egress. As currently proposed, access to these double doors would need to be accomplished over a sodded/landscaped surface subject to direct downspout runoff. Vehicle transit over the grassed surface to the rooms is further hampered by the available space between the mechanical enclosures and the top-of-slope (approximately 9' wide), and the presence of 5'-long downspouts with 4'-long riprap outlets. No pedestrian or vehicular access is provided to these double doors. Please clarify whether a dedicated vehicular and/or pedestrian way needs to be provided to service these doors.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . A dedicated vehicular and/or pedestrian way does NOT need to be provided to service these doors On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590417 Civil CS Drawings Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Page 2 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

RFP Drawings indicate an enclosure for an electrical transformer(s); no formal vehicular or pedestrian access is provided to the electrical enclosure to facilitate maintenance activities. Please clarify whether a dedicated vehicular and/or pedestrian way needs to be provided to service the electrical transformer enclosure.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . No dedicated vehicular and/or pedestrian way is required. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590422 Civil CS Drawings 01 11 00.10, 1.8.1 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 1.8.1 (page 61 of 1163) states the requirement for compliance with ADA and ABA accessibility guidelines. An accessible route serving the egress points on the south side of the H-Trainer Bays and the east side of the J-Trainer Bays is not indicated within the RFP drawings. Please confirm whether an accessible route is desired for the aforementioned egress locations.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . doors on south side of H-trainer bays and east side of J-trainer bays are for emergency egress only. no path required outside of door landing On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590435 Environmental 01 11 00.10, 1.11.1 and Appendix I Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 1.11.1 Radon Mitigation Requirements (page 61 of 1163) states "The Radiation Safety Officer has identified LRAFB as a Medium Risk Area for radon infiltration. Contractor is responsible for designing and installing radon mitigation measures..." RFP Appendix I Meeting Minutes (page 838 of 1163) states "No issues with Radon". Please confirm that this particular LRAFB project area does not require a radon mitigation system.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The Appendix I meeting notes mentioned here are a part of Appendix F.

Appendix F is a historical document for reference only. Adhere to RFP guidelines. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590444 Civil 01 11 00.10 5.7.15 and Appendix N Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 5.7.15 Dumpster Screen Enclosure (page 114 of 1163) states ."For description and requirements for dumpster screen enclosure refer to Room Description sheets in the Appendices." RFP Appendix N – Room Criteria Sheets does not appear to provide a description and the sizing requirements for the dumpster enclosure. Please clarify the dumpster enclosure footprint, height and material requirements.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Provide Dumpster enclosure in accordance with LRAFB Architectural Compatibility Guidelines On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590472 Civil CU101 and CU103 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawings CU 101 and CU103 illustrate two proposed fire hydrants situated along Vandenberg Boulevard. The Vandenberg Boulevard fire hydrant situated in the vicinity of the northeast corner of the J-Trainer Bays requires the fire department to lay hose across a roadside ditch, up a roadside embankment, through a wooded area, and across a proposed drainage swale to reach the building. The second Vandenberg Boulevard fire hydrant situated east of the southeast corner of the J-Trainer Bays requires the fire department to lay hose through a wooded area, down a 3H:1V slope, and across a drainage swale to reach the building. There may be periods of time when the drainage swales pose a traversal issue due to soft ground and/or flowing water. Are the locations of these two Vandenberg Boulevard fire hydrants acceptable to the AHJ with consideration given to accessibility and obstructions? If the

Page 3 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User locations are not considered acceptable to the AHJ please provide direction on fire hydrant placement in order to ensure bid equivalency.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Fire hydrants are placed a maximum of 300 feet apart per LRAFB requirements. The fire hydrants along Vandenburg Blvd. are easily accessible along with 6 other hydrants surrounding the building. Access from Vandenburg Blvd. would require blocking a lane of traffic, crossing a 1' deep roadside ditch, 30-40 feet of wooded area, traversing an area with 4-7 feet of vertical elevation difference and crossing another 1' deep drainage swale. Vandenburg Blvd may not be the first choice of the fire department, but I believe the fire department can manage access from Vandenburg when necessary. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590485 Environmental Appendices A,F, and I Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix A Geotechnical Report Section 5.2 (page 540 of 1163) indicates that the southeast portion of the site was previously occupied by a shooting range; lead test results are presented within Appendix A (page 605 of 1163).

RFP Appendix F Milcon Requirement Document, Section 3.3, Table 3 (page 667 of 1163) and Appendix I Meeting Minutes (page 838 of 1163) indicate that there are no heavy metal/lead concerns. Please confirm that the site is considered to be free of lead contamination and that no costs should be carried for the remediation of lead soils.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . As indicated in this bidder inquiry, lead tests were performed in the vicinity of the historic shooting range. The results of those lead tests, as well as EPA's standard limits for lead in soil, are documented in the RFP. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590488 Environmental Appendix A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix A Geotechnical Report Section 5.2 (page 540 of 1163) indicates that the site serves as depository for different materials including abandoned vehicle parts. The observation of abandoned vehicle parts could suggest the presence of environmental contamination (i.e., vehicle-associated fluids). Please confirm that the site is environmentally contaminant free and that no costs should be carried for soil and groundwater remediation efforts.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . RFP Appendix F contains a form DD1391 for an earlier version of this project.

Note, the square footages and costs shown in this appendix are not applicable, however, since the location has not changed, the site environmental assessment is accurate. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590499 Civil CS101 01 11 00.10 3.4.2.1 and Appendix I Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix I Meeting Minutes (page 836 of 1163) states a parking requirement for 3 handicap and 72 standard spaces. RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 3.4.2.1 states "A new parking lot with a total of 65 parking spaces including accessible spaces and an area for motorcycle parking." Please confirm the parking lot configuration/count illustrated within Drawing CS101 is acceptable and is the basis of the proposal.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . page 643 - page 865 are all parts of Appendix F. Appendix F is a historical document and to be used as reference only. Use RFP section 01 11 00.10 and Drawings On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590506 Civil CD101 01 11 00.10, 13.1.1 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Page 4 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

RFP Drawing CD 101 identifies the limits of logging and clearing and grubbing. Drawing CD 101, Demolition Note 13 states "Logging of existing trees by others.". RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 13.1.1 states "LRAFB will have the trees in the area of construction logged. However, this may not remove all trees and will not remove any of the stumps. The Contractor will be responsible for removal of all stumps and remaining trees in the area of construction as shown on the plans.". It would appear that the proposed utility routings will require additional logging and clearing to be conducted by the Contractor. Please confirm that logging and disposal of lumber within the limits of clearing detailed within Drawing CD 101 is not within the scope of work.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Only the logs within the boundary shown on CD 101 have been removed;

stumps, slash, and non-marketable timber remain. The site, logs and/or undergrowth, outside of the boundary shown has not been disturbed. Contractor shall confirm site conditions during site visit. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590512 Landscape Architecture CD101 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Drawing CD 101 indicates the removal of many existing trees; some trees are reported to be large. Please clarify if there is any LRAFB tree restoration policy in effect and whether tree restoration is the responsibility of others (i.e., outside scope of contract).

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . In advance preparation of this project (i.e. constructing a building on a wooded site) the marketable logs within the boundary indicated were removed from the site by the Government.

Refer to 01 11 00.10 Part 3 for Site Planning and Design. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590524 Civil Appendix F Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix F, Milcon Requirement Document (page 663 of 1163) states "Trees removed from the development area must be retained on the base and stored in a location defined by Base Environmental." Please clarify the Contractor's scope of work with regard to removing additional trees as required to facilitate the proposed utility installations. Are the incidental trees removed by the Contractor to be disposed of offsite (presumed intent) or are they to be retained on the base/stored in a location defined by Base Environmental (for anticipated significant cost to Government)?

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Appendix F is a historical document used to develop this RFP and is included for context. The marketable logs, within the boundary indicated on CD 101, have since been removed from the site by the Government. Incidental trees removed in the execution of this contract shall be disposed of by the contractor in accordance with 01 11 00.10 - 4.3. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590532 Landscape Architecture Appendices F, J, and K Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix F Milcon Requirement Document, Section 4.0.1, 9.a. (page 671 of 1163) states "Landscaping will follow LRAFB Design Criteria." Appendix J, LRAFB Architectural Compatibility Guide and Appendix K, LRAFB Design Guidance, do not appear to provide any 'real' direction with regard to landscaping. Please clarify any landscaping requirements/expectations.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Refer to 01 11 00.10 - Part 3. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590535 Civil CS102 01 11 00.10, 4.4.2 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Page 5 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.4.2 (page 74 of 1163) states "Dumpsters shall have at least 10 foot concrete apron in front of dumpsters." Drawing CS 102 does not reflect this concrete apron requirement. Please confirm that a 10-wide concrete apron is required in front of the dumpster enclosure.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The drawings provided in the RFP are conceptual in nature. The successful offer shall finalize the design in accordance with the requirements identified in the RFP. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590547 Civil CS101 UFC 3-201-01/SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55-17

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CS 101 would appear to indicate that the parking lot two-way aisle width between stall lines is 25'.

UFC 3-201-01/SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55-17 indicates that a 26' width between stall lines is required. Please confirm that the 25'-wide two-way aisle width is an acceptable deviation from UFC 3-201-01/SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55-17 guidance and that the parking lot illustrated within RFP Drawing CS 101 need not be expanded.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Will change parking stripe dimensions (not pavement) on Drawing CS 101 On:

Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590553 Civil CD101 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CD 101 indicates an underground electrical line running east-to-west across the north side of the site.

The west end of the underground electrical line appears to terminate east of the proposed northwest stormwater management area and therefore will not conflict with the proposed stormwater management facility. Please confirm that the underground electrical line terminates as illustrated within Drawing CD 101 and that relocation of the underground electrical line is not required to accommodate the proposed northwest stormwater management area.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The underground electric line is a 2" conduit with single phase medium voltage (primary) cable. It connects to the primary power line along Vandenberg Blvd. to a transformer in the ramada area. It does not extend to Thomas Avenue. I will modify CD 101 to more accurately show this electric line. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590560 Civil 01 11 00.10 4.4.2 and Appendix A Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.4.2 (page 74 of 1163) states the minimum traffic loading design criteria for the parking lot and receiving/unloading apron. RFP Appendix A, Geotechnical Report, Section 6.8 provides pavement recommendations with the caveat that no detailed pavement analysis was completed. It's not clear as to whether the pavement recommendations within the Geotechnical Report reflect the minimum traffic loading design criteria mandated within RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.4.2. For bid equivalency please confirm that the pavement sections presented within the RFP Geotechnical Report are to be utilized for proposal costing.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The pavement sections listed in the geotechnical report are minimum thicknesses. The DB contractor/DOR shall utilize the traffic loadings listed in the geotechnical report and RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.2.2 using PCASE software to determine the actual pavement material and thicknesses. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590567 Civil 01 11 00.10 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Page 6 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

RFP Section 01 11 00.10 (page 61 of 1163) makes reference to a "regulated materials report". There does not appear to be a "regulated materials report" presented within the RFP Appendices. Please clarify where we can find the "regulated materials report".

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Please provide section number of 01 11 00.10. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590573 Civil 01 11 00.10, 15.5.3.5 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 15.5.3.5 (page 206 of 1163) states "A radon survey is part of the NESHAP Environmental Survey in the Appendices."

Please provide the NESHAP Environmental Survey.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Radon is not an issue at building location. Article to be removed On: Jun 04 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590578 Civil 01 11 00.10, 4.8.4c and Appendix L Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.8.4 c. (page 77 of 1163) states "Pipe sizing: 18 inch minimum for main lines and 6 inch minimum for roof drain lines." RFP Appendix L LRAFB Specifications, Section 50 50 00, 11. f. (Gutter, Downspouts, Scuppers and Drain Systems)(page 1099 of 1163) states "Drain pipe shall be minimum 10" for maintenance purposes. Drain pipe shall meet minimum requirements of ADS N-12 Dual Walled HDPE Pipe or equal." The more stringent requirement of downspout piping being at least 10" in diameter would appear to dictate. Please clarify downspout piping requirements.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Will change Drawing CG101 and RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.8.4 c to change roof drain pipe from 6" to 10" diameter. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590584 Civil Appendix L Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix L, LRAFB Specifications, Section 50 50 00, 11. e. ((Gutter, Downspouts, Scuppers and Drain Systems)(page 1098 of 1163) states "At all gutter locations that tie into underground drainage lines provide combination drain basin/cleanout with a concrete collar and hinged ductile iron grate meeting ASTM A-48-83 Class 30B. Gutter shall tie directly into the drain pipe. Drain basin shall be Nyloplast or equal." Please confirm that all downspouts discharging to the underground collection system will each require a dedicated drain basin.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Downspouts discharging into the underground storm drain system will have a dedicated drain basin per LRAFB Design Criteria. Will modify Note 13 on Drawings CG 101, CG 102 and CG 103 accordingly. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590591 Civil CG101 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CG 101, Note 13 states "Provide roof drain (min. 6" dia.) Downspout on grade". Note 13 points to downspout collection piping. The use of the term "Downspout on grade" would typically indicate that the downspout is discharging at grade. Please clarify the contractual intent of the term "Downspout on grade".

On: May 20 2020.

Page 7 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

Government Response. . Will modify Note 13 on Drawing CG 101, CG 102, and CG 103 On: Jun 04 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590596 Civil CS102 Appendix J Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix J LRAFB Architectural Guidelines (page 914 of 1163) states "When approach aprons are used by heavy trucks, curb cuts leading into parking areas should use concrete aprons to minimize the maintenance associated with vehicular turns on asphalt." RFP Drawing CS 102 does not reflect a concrete approach apron.

Please confirm that a concrete apron is not required for the service road entrance off of Thomas Avenue.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Specifications Section 01 11 00.10, 4.2.2 requires a concrete apron in front of the dumpster. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590607 Landscape Architecture CS101 Appendix J Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix J LRAFB Architectural Guidelines (page 915 of 1163) states "Parking lot medians should be planted with trees, located so that they do not come into contact with overhanging truck bumpers. Drawing CS 101 does not reflect trees planted within the parking lot median. Please confirm that a median tree area is not required within the parking lot.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Trees were eliminated from parking lot medians by LRAFB due to maintenance concerns On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590613 Landscape Architecture Appendix J Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix J LRAFB Architectural Guidelines (page 915 of 1163) states "A goal of shading 20 percent of the parking area with trees at the lot perimeter or medians is not unreasonable." Please clarify the tree planting requirements applicable to this project.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . No tree planting is required for this project. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590619 Landscape Architecture 01 11 00.10, 3.2.3 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 3.2.3 states "Contractor shall be responsible for proper care and watering of the turf from the beginning of the turfing operation and continuing for 90 days after completion of installation or until turf is fully established." Please clarify what entails "fully established" when utilizing sod.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Will rewrite 01 11 00.10, 3.2.3 to clarify On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590630 Civil VF101 01 11 00.10 4.1.4 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.1.4 (page 69 of 1163) states "A visual and topographical site survey was conducted on this project and is included in the Appendices. GIS site information provided by LRAFB was also used to generate the conceptual drawings within this RFP. The site survey data includes planimetric features such as buildings, Page 8 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User sidewalks, roadways, parking areas visible utilities, and road culverts (including type and size). Ground surface elevations and 1-foot interval contour lines are shown as well as rim and/or throat elevations at sanitary manholes, cleanouts, storm manholes, inlets and catch basins. Known utility sizes and pertinent data are denoted by each utility line. Also shown are the location of fire hydrants and water valves plus location and type of fences and walls."

Drawing VF 101 General Survey Plan does not appear to indicate existing topography, road culverts type & size, utility structures, fire hydrants nor inlets & catch basins; . In order to evaluate the earthwork effort/cost we need to be able to assess the differences between the proposed and the existing grades. Presently no existing topography is visible within the proposed improvements/grading extents negating our ability to accurately assess the earthwork effort and cost. Please provide the existing topographical and utility data for the entire project area per RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.1.4.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Drawing VF 101 is the survey control sheet. Will add the topographic survey mapping to the amendment. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590639 Civil CD101 and CD102 01 11 00.10, 4.3.2 and Appendix J Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10 , 4.3.2 (page 73 of 1163) states "A 6 inch water line running north-south through the proposed site shall be removed. Drawing CD-101 and CD-102 in the Appendices locates the existing lines." Appendix J (page 858 of 1163) review comments would appear to indicate that an 8" line is to be removed. Please clarify the sizing and material of the waterline designated to be removed.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The pipe to be removed is a 6" PVC water line per LRAFB utility maps. On:

Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590650 Contracting 01 11 00.10, 4.2 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.2 Design Standards and Codes (page 70 of 1163) requires compliance with a number of UFCs and design codes. Within the listing of applicable UFCs are ones that are cancelled (UFC 3-210-01A), replaced (UFC 3-220-03FA, UFC 3-210-05FA, UFC 3-220-01N, UFC 3-230-03A, UFC 3-230-04A, UFC 3-230-10A, UFC 3-230- 19N, UFC 3-240-07FA, UFC 3-250-18FA, UFC 4-010-02, UFC 3-430-05FA), inactive (UFC 3-230-06A) and incorrectly named (UFC 3-230-01). FAA AC150/5320-5C (Design and Maintenance of Airport Surface Systems) is cancelled and whose applicability to the project is suspect. Please confirm that we are only required to comply with the latest editions of active UFCs applicable to the fuselage trainer facility project.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Successful Offeror shall comply with the latest editions of the active UFCs applicable to the Fuselage project. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590661 Civil CU Drawings 01 11 00.10, 4.15.6a and Appendix L

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix L LRAFB Specifications Section 50 50 00, 1.03 D. 4. (page 1084 of 1163) states "At TEES a gate valve should be installed on each branch; 3 gate valves per tee." RFP CU-series Drawings do not fully reflect this LRAFB requirement. However RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.15.6 a. (page 89 of 1163) states "Install two (2) valves for each water main tee." Please clarify the requirement for gate valves at Tees.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Jacksonville Water Works (JWW) now owns and operates the water system on LRAFB. JWW thoroughly reviewed the utility plans for this project and they only require 2 gate valves per tee. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

Page 9 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

8590672 Civil CU101 UFC 3-240-01

RFP Drawing CU 101 illustrates a 6" sanitary sewer lateral approximately 375' in length with one cleanout. UFC 3-240-01, 2-1.1 requires compliance with the State sewerage regulations (Arkansas Plumbing Code 2006). Per code cleanouts are required to be located at intervals of not more than 100 feet. With regard to sanitary sewer cleanouts please clarify whether the RFP Drawings or UFC requirements take precedence.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Will add sewer cleanouts 100 feet apart per Arkansas Plumbing Code. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590688 Civil CU101 and CG101 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CU 101 (quadrant B7) states "Provide min. 2' vertical clearance from exist. storm drain to prop. water line. (See Sheet CG 101)". RFP Drawing CG 101 illustrates a new/proposed 18" min. RCP storm pipe at the point of crossing the proposed water loop. Please clarify whether the Drawing CU 101 note pertains to the proposed storm piping or if there is existing storm piping (in addition to that storm piping being proposed) that must be accommodated.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . It is a proposed storm drain line. Will modify note on CU 101. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590694 Civil 01 11 00.10, 4.15.5e Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Jacksonville Water Works Draft 2020 Specifications, Section G7.4 C (page 86 of 137) states " The minimum cover over the pipe shall be thirty-six (36) inches unless directed otherwise by Jacksonville Water Works. Maximum depth of cover above all pipe shall be forty-eight (48) inches. Any deviations in depth of cover will require prior approval from Jacksonville Water Works." RFP Section 01 11 00.10,

4.15.5 e. (page 88 of 1163) states "Minimum cover to be 4 feet. 42 inch cover allowed only on a case-by-case basis (design dependent) for rock and crossing locations." The JWW and RFP direction with regard to depth of cover are at odds; please clarify what depth of cover requirement dictates.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Will modify Spec Section 01 11 00.10, 4.15.5e to be consistent with JWW requirements. Also, we will try to get a copy of the JWW Draft Specifications to include as an Appendix to the RFP package. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590698 Civil CS101 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CS 101, Construction Note 8, please clarify the bicycle rack size required.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Will modify Note 8 on CS 101 to specify 4" thick concrete and rack for minimum of 5 bicycles On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590718 Civil CS102 01 11 00.10, 4.11.1 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CS 102, Construction Note 6 states "Install 6 qty., 3' tall, 8"-diameter removable bollards spaced 8' o.c.

with a chain extending between them." The weight of the removable bollard (contingent upon design) would likely range between ~86 pounds (3' above ground only) to ~171 pounds (3' aboveground/3' embedment)(weights based on

Page 10 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

8"-diameter, Sch. 40 black steel pipe). RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.11.1 states "Removable bollards shall have the capability of being moved by one person." UFC 3-600-01, 9-1.3 states "All force protection equipment, such as bollards or gates, must not require more than one person to remove or open." With the attached chain and weight of the bollard it would appear that the proposed bollard/chain system could not readily be removed by one person contravening RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 4.11.1 and UFC 3-600-01 requirements. For bid equivalency please clarify the bollard/gate requirements at the service drive.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Will modify the diameter of the bollard to 5" diameter steel guard post schedule 40 with 1/4" x 5 3/16" diameter cap plate. On: Jun 04 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590728 Landscape Architecture 01 11 00.10, 13.2.2 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Section 01 11 00.10, 13.2.2 Building Demolition (page 201 of 1163) states "The site shall be finish graded level with surroundings and hydroseeded." RFP specification and drawings indicate that sod is to be utilized. Please confirm that sod must be utilized.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Sod is required not hydroseeding. Will modify 01 11 00.10, 13.2.2 On: Jun 05 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590736 Civil CG101 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CG 101. Outlet control devices will likely be employed within stormwater management areas. Please provide the LRAFB requirements with respect to the outlet control structures

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . LRAFB design criteria DIV 50 civil structural - C-1.03-F-2 states "Flared end sections are required - headwalls are not acceptable." No other base limits on outlet control. On: Jun 05 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590743 Civil CG 101, CG102, CG103

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Drawing CG 101, Grading & Drainage Note 2 specifies a volumetric minimum for the drainage basin. Similar volumetric requirements are provided within RFP Drawings CG 102 and CG 103. Please clarify what aspect of the stormwater management design that this volumetric requirement applies.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Please clarify the question. The grading and pipe layout shown on CG 101, CG 102, and CG 103 are conceptual. Final design development is the responsibility of the DB Designer of Record. On: Jun 05 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590747 Civil Civil Drawings Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

The RFP Drawings indicate several stormwater management areas. The basis for the design of these stormwater management areas is not clear so it is difficult to assess (with the available proposal time) whether they are sufficiently sized and configured. For bid equivalency please confirm that the RFP drawings reflect the desired sizing of the stormwater management facilities.

On: May 20 2020.

Page 11 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

Government Response. . RFP drawings are conceptual. They generally show minimum requirements based on applicable standards and conceptual drainage analysis. Final design development is the responsibility of the DB Designer of Record. On: Jun 05 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590834 Architectural Architctural Drawings 00 11 00 CLIN Schedule

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

The RFP indicates that Option 005 is to reduce the width of rooms 158 and 178 from 32-ft to 24-ft. Please confirm that rooms 159 and 176 will also become 24-ft wide.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Correct, With option 005, the high line trainer bays are to be reduced to 24'-0" and the associated Aircraft Power/Aircraft parts storage rooms will also be reduced. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590839 Architectural Architectural Drawings 01 11 00 CLIN Schedule

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

The RFP indicates that Option 005 is to reduce the width of rooms 158 and 178 from 32-ft to 24-ft. Please confirm that doors 158 & 178 are also to reduce width by 8-ft to maintain the adjacent personnel doors in the same 158 and 178 spaces.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Roll up doors are not to be reduced in size with option 005. Personnel door to remain in equal proximity to overhead doors of resized bays. Personnel door can be in adjacent spaces as no physical separation is between high line bay and adjacent trainer bay. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590841 Architectural Architectural Drawings 00 11 00 CLIN Schedule

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

The RFP indicates that Option 005 is to reduce the width of rooms 158 and 178 from 32-ft to 24-ft. Please confirm that overall length of building will also be reduced by this 8-ft dimension, as will the gross square foot area of the project.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Correct On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590866 Contracting 00 11 00 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP section 00 11 00 notes several options that require significant design changes if implemented. 00 72 00 52.217-7 states that the Contracting Officer may exercise the option within 150 calendar days of award. Please consider changing this so that the options will be awarded at the time of award for the base CLIN, so there is no adverse impact on the design progress and overall schedule.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . This will remain at 150 calendar days. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590881 Contracting 01 11 00.10, 5.3 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Page 12 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

RFP 01 11 00.10 section 5.3 indicates outdated standards and codes. Should these dates/versions be ignored and the editions indicated in section 4.2 be followed on this project?

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Codes indicated in section 5.3 to be utilized with the latest editions, including applicable changes. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590885 Contracting 01 11 00.10, 5.3 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP 01 11 00.10 section 5.3 indicates a web page for AFH 32-1084. The provided link does not work. Please provide an updated link. If we are to look at the AFMAN 32-1084, as is currently available on the WBDG.org site, please further clarify which sub-document we are to follow for this project.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Updated link is below with supportive information.

https://www.wbdg.org/ffc/af-afcec/manuals-afm/afman-32-1084

Category Group 17.

CC 171212 Flight Simulator Training On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590891 Architectural 01 11 00.10, 5.13 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP 01 11 00.10, section 5.13 ends with "(Provide specification section 11 24 20)". Is this an RFP requirement for the Contactor or a note to the RFP preparer?

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . RFP requirement for the Contractor On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590894 Contracting UFC 4-211-01N Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

The RFP makes multiple references to UFC 4-211-01N. Please confirm that 4-211-01N has been replaced by 4-211- 01, dated 01 November 2017.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Correct, use the most recent version of 4-211-01 On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590899 Structural 01 11 00.10, 6.2.4.e Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP 01 11 00.10, section 6.2.4.e notes referring to UFC 4-211-01 for additional wind load criteria. Considering that this does not qualify as a hangar structure, please be specific about what additional wind criteria is to be considered for this project.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The wind requirements of UFC 4-211-01 do not apply to this structure. Section 6.2.4.e will be deleted. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590902 Structural 01 11 00.10, 6.3

Page 13 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

RFP 01 11 00.10, section 6.3, 2nd paragraph, indicates that the admin spaces are to be separated for full height.

Please confirm that these walls are full height of the admin portion, per UFC 4-211-01.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . CMU fire walls will separate trainer bays from the administrative space. Wall to fully separate spaces in accordance with UFC 4-211-01. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590904 Structural 01 11 00.10, 6.3.1 and 6.3.2.1 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP 01 11 00.10, section 6.3.1 indicates that the trainer bay floor is to be sloped. Section 6.3.2.1 notes that the floor flatness and levelness are to meet a certain requirement. Please delete the requirement for a level floor for the trainer bay since those floors are required to be sloped.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . The floor slab levelness criteria does not apply to the trainer bays. The levelness criteria does apply to the training support area. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590905 Structural 01 11 00.10, 6.4.3.2 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP 01 11 00.10, section 6.4.3.2 indicates requirements for joints in walls. Please confirm these masonry requirements are for unreinforced non-load bearing walls and the spacing of joints and reinforcing requirements for the shear walls are by the structural engineer of record.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Confirmed. EOR shall design masonry shear walls, including joint spacing and reinforcing requirements, in accordance with applicable design codes and standards. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590910 Structural 01 11 00.10, 6.5.8 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP 01 11 00.10, section 6.5.8 indicates a building drift limitation of H/600. This dramatically exceeds building code requirements as well as requirements of UFC 3-010-01. For example, UFC 3-301-01 section 2-4.2 requires an H/480 maximum drift limit for 10 year MRI winds; so the loads are less and the drift is greater than what the RFP is allowing. Similarly for earthquake loads, the UFC references ASCE 7-16, which provide limits on the order of H/66 for a moment frame, assuming the building remains stable, and H/150 for masonry structures. Please confirm the H/600 drift limitation can be replaced by the requirements of ASCE-7 and UFC 3-301-01.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . UFC 3-301-01 also states "Consideration must be given to cladding systems when evaluating lateral drift as a more stringent drift limitation may be appropriate for certain cladding system." Since part of the cladding system is brick veneer, maximum drift limits for steel moment frames would not meet the serviceability requirements for the brick veneer.

It is acceptable to use the drift limits of UFC 3-301-01 provided that proper consideration is given to serviceability of brick veneer including, but not limited to, UFC 3-301-01 Table 2-1. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590913 Structural 01 11 00.10, 6.5.11 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Page 14 of 47ProjNet: Logged In User

RFP 01 11 00.10, section 6.5.11 notes that the clear working overhead clearance above the fuselage trainer tail is 28-feet. The following paragraph indicates that the roof structure is to be 30-ft above the floor in all locations of the trainer bay. Please confirm that this 30-ft high clearance above the slab applies at the fuselage trainer tail as well.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . 30-ft is the nominal clearance to the roof at all locations. 28-ft is the required clearance for the fuselage trainer tail to all structural, mechanical, and electrical fixtures that might be hung from the roof structure at the plan locations described in Section 6.5.11. On: May 22 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590918 Structural Appendix G Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix G, section 4.4.1 describes that there are cradles to support the trainer. Please confirm that the DB Contractor selected by this RFP does not supply these cradles.

On: May 20 2020.

Government Response. . Cradles are provided by trainer supplier for new C-130J trainers. On: May 22 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8590923 Structural Appendix G Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

RFP Appendix G, section 4.4.1 describes that there are…