ASPHALT Repair Services JST W912HN26QA006 Q_A 06 Feb 2026.pdf

ASPHALT REPAIR SERVICES AT J. STROM THURMOND DAM AND LAKE | W912HN26QA006

Q&A 06 FEB 2026

NO. DOCUMENT

REFERENCE (IF ANY)

ISSUE / COMMENT/

QUESTION

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE/ANSWER

1 Solicitation, PWS 2.3 Required meetings beyond Initial In-person Kick-off Meeting and Close-out meeting are not delineated. 2.3.2 The contractor's site management team representative shall provide the COR with operational status and updates.

Question: Does the government require daily updates or weekly updates?

Meetings will be discussed during the kickoff meeting, along with the overall project schedule.

Reporting requirements will focus on practical, common-sense needs rather than reporting for the sake of reporting.

2 Wheel Stops During the site visit, it was stated that the Government would remove/replace wheel stops in parking areas as applicable before work commenced. Is it still the Government's position that they will remove/replace all identified and applicable wheel stops, or will that requirement transfer the contractor?

YES, there is no expetations that the contractor will be required to remove the wheels stops.

3 Solicitation, Technical Factor Evaluation, Staffing was only mentioned under evaluation factors with no specified breakdown. Is it the Government's position that the site Superintendent, Site Safety and Health Officer, and Quality Control Inspector be different personnel, or will be accepted that one qualified person could field all three roles, aka "triple hat"?

Under FAR Part 13, it is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure compliance with all applicable regulatory and contractual requirements. The solicitation does not prescribe a staffing breakdown beyond identifying evaluation factors, and it does not explicitly require the Site Superintendent, Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO), and Quality Control (QC) roles to be filled by separate individuals.

Unless the solicitation or incorporated clauses (such as EM 385-1-1 or agency-specific safety/quality requirements) mandate dedicated personnel, the Government may accept a single qualified individual performing multiple roles (“triple-hat”), provided that:

The individual meets all qualification requirements for each role, and

The contractor can demonstrate that one person can effectively perform all duties without compromising safety, quality, or oversight.

Ultimately, it remains the contractor’s responsibility to propose a staffing approach that meets regulatory requirements and ensures successful performance.

4 Solicitation, Continuation of Deliveries and Performance, Pages 16-17, 69

The Period of Performance is listed as 21 Feb 2026 to 31 Mar 2026, however PWS

4.3 states period of performance shall be from contract award until 27 March 2026. Which end date is the correct date?

Per the solicitation, the required completion date is 31 March 2026. The campgrounds open on 27 March, so the preference would be to have the three affected parks completed by 27 March 2026 if feasible. The 31 March date was provided due to time constraints and to minimize impacts to the park and its patrons.

5 Period of Performance Due to the compressed timeline, would the Government accept completion all physical work by end of PoP, with close out documentation

Yes, however, Government has the ability to conduct close out inspections same day as work is completed.

and final inspections completed after PoP?

6 Deep Patching / Pavement Repairs

The project plans and specifications do not include any requirements for deep patching or full depth pavement repairs.

However, based on observations during the site visit, there appear to be areas of weak or failing pavement and areas with tree root intrusion that may require patching in order to meet performance and warranty requirements.

Please clarify how these areas will be identified, what repair methods are anticipated, and how such work is to be included in the proposal?

Any roadway, parking lot, crack sealing, or drainage repair needs outside the scope of what is addressed during the milling and paving process will be identified by the contractor during performance. The Government will then verify the condition and determine whether additional work is required. If the Government confirms that additional repairs are necessary and they fall outside the original scope of the FFP requirement, the Government may pursue a contract modification to incorporate such work. This approach ensures that all offerors bid on the same baseline scope while preserving the Government’s ability to address unforeseen conditions in a controlled and compliant manner.

7 Weak / Failing Pavement

Based on the same observed weak or failing pavement areas mentioned above, we have concerns regarding loaded tandem trucks and construction equipment traversing areas that are not designated for repair. It is our understanding that if these areas deteriorate or fail due to existing conditions, they are not the contractor’s responsibility and are not included to be repaired under this project.

Please confirm this understanding and advise of any restrictions, requirements, or special provisions related to

The Government acknowledges the concern regarding construction traffic over existing pavement areas that are not designated for repair.

Under this requirement, the contractor is responsible for protecting existing facilities during performance; however, deterioration or failure that results solely from pre-existing conditions and not from contractor operations is not considered the contractor’s responsibility.

The contractor must plan and manage construction traffic to avoid causing additional damage. If heavy equipment or loaded tandem trucks are routed across areas not intended to support such loads, and deterioration results from that activity, the contractor may be responsible for repairs.

At this time, no additional restrictions or special provisions beyond those stated in the solicitation are identified. The contractor should implement construction traffic in these areas?

appropriate means and methods to prevent avoidable damage and notify the Government if previously unknown failing conditions are encountered.

8 Asphalt Thickness Are there any existing asphalt thickness cores or typical section data available that show the current depths of asphalt pavement in the designated work areas for all CLINs? If there is not at least 2" of existing asphalt in the areas to be paved, will the COR accept placing the proposed 2" asphalt overlay on the existing subgrade (dirt,stone,etc.)?

The Government does not have asphalt thickness cores or typical section data available to provide to prospective contractors. Based on the COR’s experience with previous milling and replacement projects, most areas contain at least 2 inches of existing asphalt. In locations where less than 2 inches of asphalt is present, the contractor shall mill to the roadway base, which generally consists of compacted dirt and stone, and proceed in accordance with the specifications and project requirements.

9 Solicitation, Continuation of Deliveries and Performance, Pages 3- 5, 7, 12-14, 64, 68

The scope of work references crack sealing and requires that cracks be properly cleaned and sealed. It is our understanding that crack sealing is not intended for this project and that the milling and overlay operations will address any existing cracking, eliminating the need for crack sealing. Please confirm that the Government is in agreement with this

Your understanding is correct. Crack sealing is not intended as a required activity under this requirement. The reference remains in the scope only to allow its use if needed and falls under the previously provided “as-needed” guidance. The planned milling and overlay operations are expected to address existing cracking, and the Government does not anticipate separate crack-sealing work as part of this project.

No additional crack-sealing requirements are identified at this time.

interpretation?

Implementation of crack sealing would significantly impact production and make the current project schedule unattainable.

10 Erosion Control Measures

On most SCDOT and GDOT mill and overlay projects, erosion control BMPs are not required. Please advise to what extent erosion control measures are required for this project and identify any specific BMPs that are to be implemented?

In the event of rainfall or if milling operations expose areas with known erosion concerns, the contractor is expected to implement basic, temporary measures to prevent sediment from leaving the work area. These actions fall under the previously stated “as-needed” guidance and are not intended to constitute full erosion-control BMP deployment as seen on larger earthwork projects.

At this time, the Government does not require specific BMPs for this project. However, if site conditions during construction indicate that limited controls such as temporary berms, inlet protection, or other minimal measures are necessary to prevent runoff during active milling operations, the contractor will notify the goverment accordingly.

11 Solicitation, Continuation of Deliveries and Perfomance, Pages 3- 5, 7, 12-14, 60, 64

The scope of work calls out for repairing drainage effects as necessary. What does the government consider to be a "drainage effects"? The contractor does not plan on changing the existing grade based on the mill out of 2 inch and replace with 2 inch.

Therefore, we are not tracking any shoulder building or grading. Please advise if you are in agreement to this understanding.

For this requirement, “drainage effects” refers only to minor, localized issues that may arise as a direct result of the milling and overlay operations such as incidental edge buildup, isolated low spots, or conditions that could impede surface drainage after the new pavement is placed. It is not intended to require shoulder construction, regrading, or any alteration of the existing roadway profile.

The Government agrees with the contractor’s understanding that the 2-inch mill and 2-inch overlay will maintain the existing grade, and no shoulder building or grading is anticipated under this project. Any drainage-related adjustments would fall under the previously provided “as-needed” guidance and would be limited to small, corrective actions necessary to ensure proper surface drainage following the overlay.

12 CLINS 0001 and 0003

PoP Per Amendment 0002 dated 02 February 2026, the Scope of Work Item No.

14 states that work at Lake Springs and Ridge Road is to begin on 01 April 2026.

Based on this statement, please clarify the corresponding end date for this work. Additionally, CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0003 on Page 5 indicate an end date of 01 April 2026, which appears to conflict with the above-referenced Scope of Work language.

Please confirm the intended start and end dates for work at Lake Springs and Ridge Road?

The POP's for CLINs 0001 and 0003 have been extended to allow scheduling flexibility, as these parks open later in the season. The revised POP for these locations is 21 February through 01 May, which provides adequate time for the contractor to perform the required work within the operational constraints of the parks.

13 Solicitation, Page 14, Paragraph 3.1

Per Paragraph 3.1 (Page 14) of the contract documents, the Contractor is required to coordinate work to avoid conflicts with other contractors and the Thurmond Operations and Maintenance Contractor.

Please confirm whether there are any current or anticipated activities scheduled to be performed concurrently with the proposed milling and paving operation?

Yes, there are other active contracts in the area.

Per Paragraph 3.1 (Page 14), the Contractor is required to coordinate work to avoid conflicts with other contractors and with the Thurmond Operations and Maintenance Contractor. Any necessary coordination will be facilitated through the COR.

At this time, the Government is aware of ongoing and routine activities within the project vicinity;

however, no additional concurrent work has been identified that would directly interfere with the proposed milling and paving operations. Should any new or unscheduled activities arise during the Period of Performance, the COR will coordinate with all parties to avoid conflicts and maintain safe, efficient access for all contractors

14 Pavement Repairs and Drainage Effects

Per Page 4, Miscellaneous Text, the contract documents reference roadway repairs and drainage improvements. In addition, Paragraph 2.5.9 on Page 14 references pavement repairs and drainage effects. However, the contract documents do not clearly define the extent, limits, or specific types of roadway or pavement repairs required.

Please clarify the Government’s expectations regarding the extent and type of roadway repairs and pavement repairs to be performed under this contract?

Further, please clarify the intended scope of drainage improvements and what is meant by “drainage effects,” including how such effects are expected to be addressed as part of the work.

This clarification is requested to ensure accurate interpretation of the scope of work and proper pricing.

The references to roadway repairs, pavement repairs, and drainage improvements in the contract documents are intended to address only minor, localized issues that may arise as a direct result of the milling and overlay operations. The Government does not expect broad or undefined roadway reconstruction, shoulder work, or grading beyond what is necessary to support the 2-inch mill and 2-inch overlay.

The Government’s expectation is that repairs will be limited to small, incidental areas where the milling and paving operations reveal isolated deficiencies that must be corrected to ensure proper placement and performance of the new asphalt. These repairs fall under the previously provided “as-needed” guidance and are not intended to represent a separate, large-scale repair effort.

“Drainage effects” refers to minor corrective actions needed to maintain proper surface drainage after the overlay such as addressing isolated low spots, edge buildup, or other conditions created directly by the milling and paving work. These actions are not intended to include shoulder construction, regrading, or modification of the existing roadway profile.

The Government agrees that the contractor’s pricing and planning should be based on the 2-inch mill and 2-inch overlay maintaining the existing grade, with only limited, localized corrective actions performed if necessary to ensure proper drainage and pavement performance.

15 Solicitation, Page 12, Paragraph 2.5.2

Per Paragraph 2.5.2, Page 12, the acceptance criteria state that all repairs shall be properly filled with durable materials. Please clarify that this requirement applies only to repairs associated with

The requirement in Paragraph 2.5.2 for all repairs to be “properly filled with durable materials” applies only to repairs associated with the new pavement construction specifically, any localized pavement repairs or asphalt crack repairs that occur within the areas being milled and overlaid.

This requirement is not intended to apply to new pavement construction and asphalt crack repairs within areas that are milled and overlaid. This requirement is not intended to apply to existing asphalt pavement outside the limits of milling and overlay.

existing asphalt pavement outside the limits of the milling and overlay work. No repairs to pavement beyond the defined work limits are anticipated under this contract unless otherwise directed by the Government under the previously provided “as-needed” guidance.

16 Crack Seal Quantity If the intent of the government is to utilize crack seal in this project, please identify the areas this is intended to be utilized and a quantity of prosed use? This quantity if used is typically provided by LF quantity or mile log.

As previously stated, crack sealing is not intended as a required activity under this project and remains in the scope only to allow its use on an as-needed basis. At this time, the Government has not identified any areas where crack sealing is expected to be performed, nor is any quantity established for pricing or planning purposes.

Should conditions encountered during construction indicate that limited crack sealing is necessary, the Government will provide direction at that time.

17 Liquidated Damages The original solicitation with amendments has been reviewed and we do not see any reference to liquidated damages. Are liquidated damages applicable to this solicitation? If yes, what is the liquidated damages per day amount?

The solicitation issued under FAR Part 13 does not include a liquidated damages clause, nor does it specify a daily rate. Liquidated damages are not automatically applicable to simplified acquisitions and must be expressly included to be enforceable. Since no such clause appears in the solicitation or amendments, liquidated damages do not apply to this requirement.

18 Bid Schedule

With the amended SOWs and evolved PoPs, will the Government be issuing a revised Bid Schedule or are Offeror’s to create their own? The current pricing structure does not align with the modified RFQ.

At this time, the Government does not intend to issue a revised quote schedule. Offerors should prepare their pricing using the existing CLIN structure, which consists of five CLINs - one per park each listed as Quantity: 1, Unit: Job.

The unit price for each CLIN, expressed as dollars per square foot, is intended to be fully inclusive of all costs required to perform the work at that specific park. This includes all labor, equipment, materials, mobilization, traffic control, and any other costs necessary to complete the work described in the SOW for that CLIN. Offerors should base their pricing on the total square footage associated with each park and ensure that the price per square foot represents the complete cost to perform all required work under that CLIN.

As a reminder, in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 addendum in teh solicitation, offerors must provide sufficient supporting information to allow the Government to determine that the proposed price is fair and reasonable. Price will be evaluated to determine whether it is fair, reasonable, balanced, and reflective of a clear understanding of the requirement. The Government will assess the completeness of the price proposal and evaluate whether the proposed price aligns with the offeror’s technical approach, production rates, staffing levels, and proposed schedule.