B.08.03 Question & Answer #3 20240903.pdf
PDF 108 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Tuttle Creek Project Roof Replacement
- Solicitation number
- W912DQ24Q1064
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a federal solicitation for the Tuttle Creek Administration Building Roof Replacement project (Solicitation Number W912DQ24Q1064). The key details are:
The project requires the removal of the existing EPDM roof system and chimney, and replacement with a new EPDM sloped roofing system, new gutters, and downspouts. Access is available around the building to use a boom lift/man basket for the chimney removal. Substitutions for the existing roof deck type are allowed if an equivalent product is used that meets the requirements. The contractor must provide all required equipment, labor, supervision, and materials. This is a small business set-aside requirement with an estimated contract value between $100,000 and $250,000. The period of performance is 180 days from the Notice to Proceed.
View the file
Other files
Show all 11
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A #3
Tuttle Creek Roof Replacement
W912DQ24Q1064
Question 6: Is there access around the building to use a boom lift/man basket for the removal of the chimney?
Answer: Yes, there is a paved parking lot (north) adjacent to the rear of the building nearest the chimney. Page 6 of the drawings (O&M Plate 231-A) show the chimney, sidewalk along the north side of the building which is immediately adjacent to the paved parking behind the building.
Question 7: Specification Section 01 00 00/Paragraph 3.6.1 Vapor Retarder on Steel Decks. Can we substitute the hot mop asphalt as a moisture barrier with asphalt peel and stick? Chris will need to answer this.
Answer: This would be acceptable method.
Question 8: Regarding the existing building, due to the age of the building if the existing deck type is not available can we substitute for an equivalent deck type? Chris will need to answer this.
Answer: Yes, an equivalent substitute that complies with section 2.6 requirements will be acceptable.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .