Questions_and_Answers_-_20_May_2016.pdf

QUESTION & ANSWER

20 May 2016

W912JM-16-R-0003 Construct C-130 Squadron Operations Facility

Q1: Specification Section 01 45 00 3.4.1 - Is the "Safety and Health Manager" a contractor-provided position required for this project? If so, please provide the qualifications and duties of the "Manager".

A1: Yes, it is a contractor provided person, however, a separate dedicated position is not required, provided that the “Safety and Health Manager” meets all the qualifications of a “Site Safety and Health Officer” (SSHO) as defined by the latest published edition of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) EM 385-1-1 Safety and Health Requirements Manual. This includes direct reporting to the most senior project official or a corporate official, full-time on-site presence, proof of the 30-hour OSHA General Industry or Construction Safety class training requirement, proof of five-year continuous employment in the supervision and management of safety programs covered by their 30-Hour training, and, the 8-Hour annual competency requirement. Consult the EM 385-1-1 for specific questions and clarifications, no exceptions will be made, no provisions will be waived, nor will further clarifications be issued, and all appointees will have all required documentation in place prior to start of any work. Individual shall be provided full authority by the Prime Contractor to implement and enforce the Safety and Accident Plan(s) developed by contractor and approved by Contracting Officer for project use. Appointed Individuals are expected to manage, implement, and enforce the contractors accident prevention plan, environmental safety training and health programs, hazardous waste operations, and emergency response as may be required. They will liaison with the installation Safety office and get further direction on local requirements at the preconstruction conference.

Q2: Specification Section 01 45 00 3.4.3 - Since this is a fully-designed project, are the Design-related Quality Control personnel required to be contractor-provided for this project? (Architectural, Environmental, Design Quality Control Manager)

A2: Quality Control is a Prime Contractors sole responsibility. Design related errors and omissions are the responsibility of the government’s subconsultant engineers to resolve if deemed necessary.

Q3: Specification Section 09 69 19 - The "Stringerless Raised Floor System" specification conflicts with raised-floor drawings (for example, C1/A-361). Drawings show raised floor constructed on-site with light-gauge metal framing and plywood decking. Please provide clarification.

A3: The area defined by a dashed line in room 125 on sheet A-101A (keynote 14, and section C1/A523) defines the limits of the Raised Floor System. Room 126, Room 127, the associated stair & platform to those rooms, and the stage located in Briefing Room 103 are detailed on sheet A-403 and include reference to delegated design requirements in specification section 05 40 00 and general notes. Details on C1/A-361 referenced from sheet A-403 shall comply with the same delegated design requirements and general notes listed on sheet A-403.

Q4: Drawing I-452 - Please provide specification and design detail requirement for the "3D Paintable MDF Texture System".

A4: 3D Paintable MDF Texture Panel system is further detailed in B1/A403. Install per manufacturers recommendations. Specifications for this items are located in 06 20 00 2.6 and 3.4. A basis of design (BOD) manufacturer for this system would be Architectural Systems, Inc - Sculptured Collection (or equivalent).

Q5: Drawing A-201 - Please provide specification, BOD and installation detail requirement for the "Fiber Cement Wall Panel System" (typical 9/A-201; 10/A-201)

A5: Fiber Cement Wall Panel System is defined in specification section 06 20 00 - Finish

Carpentry. Sections 2.5.1 and 3.3.1 define the Fiber Cement Panel System Requirements. A BOD of this system would be Nichiha, Illumination Series (or equivalent).

Q6: Drawing A-352 - Please provide specification, BOD and installation detail requirement for the "Prefinished Fiber Cement Soffit" (typical A1/A-352; A2/A-352)

A6: Prefinished Fiber Cement Soffit is defined in specification section 06 20 00 - Finish Carpentry.

Sections 2.5.2, and 3.3.2 define the Fiber Cement Panel System Requirements.

Q7: Drawing E-614 - General Notes 1.e. - Please clarify requirement details, including routes and connection details, for the (CFCI) Cabling and Antenna Mounting Provisions.

A7: With adequate time given to carefully reviewing all notes on the entire page there is enough information already presented on E-614 to accomplish the task. The 60’ Antenna tower is a shop drawing submittal requirement. CFCI (New) Antennae 1A and 2A are installed on mounting arm at the 50’ level. CFCI (New) Antennae 1B and 2B are installed on mounting arm at the 40’ level. Relocated GFCI (Existing) Antennae 3B, 4A, and 5A will get installed on mounting arm at the 30’ level. Relocated GFCI (Existing) GPS Antenna 3A will get installed as close to top of tower as possible. Refer also to specifications 01 11 00, para 1.5 “Government Furnished Material and Equipment”. Refer to General Notes on E-100, and the internal facility communications cabling routes on E-131A/B.

Q8: Drawing E-614 - General Notes 1.f. - Please clarify requirement details for the (CFCI) UHF Antenna 1A, and the VHF Antenna 2A. Are these not supposed to be government-furnished?

A8: No, contractor is purchasing these two new (CFCI) Antennae 1A and 2A and installing at the 50’ level on the tower. Do not confuse with the four GFCI Antennae 3A, 3B, 4A, and 5A you will be relocating.

Q9: Drawing E-614 - General Notes 1.g. - Please clarify requirement details for the (CFCI) VHF Antenna 1B, and the VHF Antenna 2B. Are these not supposed to be government-furnished?

A9: No, contractor is purchasing these two new (CFCI) Antennae 1B and 2B and installing at the 40’ level on the tower. Do not confuse with the four GFCI Antennae 3A, 3B, 4A, and 5A you will be relocating.

Q10: Drawing C-102 and C-103 - A note requirement says "Protect Ex. Light Pole and Circuit to Remain". At the site visit, we identified three poles between the Building 1914 and the Airfield. Please clarify which pole is to remain and which pole(s) are to be demolished. {I have attached a photo from the site visit with labels for these 3 poles.}

A10: Please also see plan sheet ED-100 and E-100, Keynote 6. The large 105’ tall red and white painted lighting pole with several banks of stadium lights is for lighting the adjacent airfield, is to remain, and has a footing that can be compromised if digging around it. All the typical wooden electrical power poles holding secondary overhead electrical wiring is to be removed as highlighted on ED-100. As discussed on the job walk this specific 105’ tall pole was identified and will need protected by jersey barriers seven feet out from pole in all directions. The footing is 14’ x 14’ square. There will be no disturbance of site within the protected 14’ x 14’ area. No further clarifications coming, awarded contractor will receive additional guidance if required during pre-construction conference.

Q11: Drawing C-102 - There is a Road Cut shown across Bland Blvd. for new water lines. Would boring under the road for these water lines be acceptable instead of the road cut, which would require traffic stoppage and asphalt patching?

A11: Yes, this will be an acceptable means and methods as far as the government is concerned, however, coordination is required between the contractor and the City of Savannah Water and Sewer Department who will ultimately own and maintain these sections of water infrastructure upstream of the Backflow device/water meter equipment. City Of Savannah requirements will dictate. It is the contractors’ sole responsibility to investigate, coordinate, and gain clarification, and approval on these means and methods.

Q12: Specification Section 01 32 01.00 10 Initial Project Schedule includes reference to design-build schedule detailing design and permitting activities. Please clarify that this is not a design-build project.

A12: Any reference to “Design-Build” or to “design phases” should be deleted. Refer to revised specification “01 32 01.00 10 Project Schedule (R1) – 16 May 2016” which includes strike outs of the non-applicable provisions.

Q13. Can you please provide the HPSB checklist attachment #1 referenced in Section 01 33 29/ 1.4 Guiding Principles Validation (GPV)?

A13: The High Performance Sustainability Building (HPSB) guidance is available on the internet at http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/DOD/UFC/ufc_1_200_02.pdf

Q14. For this project, is it acceptable that the Site Superintendent also perform the duties of the Site Safety & Health Officer?

A14: Yes, provided both, repeat BOTH the primary and any alternate superintendents meet all the qualifications of a Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) as defined by the latest published edition of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) EM 385-1-1 Safety and Health Requirements Manual. This means contractor shall always have a SSHO trained Superintendent present at any time work is underway. This includes requirements for direct reporting to the most senior project official (where SSHO is also Superintendent), full-time on-site presence, proof of the 30-hour OSHA General Industry or Construction Safety class training requirement, proof of five-year continuous employment in the supervision and management of safety programs covered by their 30-Hour training, and, the 8-Hour annual competency requirement. Consult the EM 385-1-1 for specific questions and clarifications, no exceptions will be made, no provisions will be waived, nor will further clarifications be issued, and all appointees will have all required documentation in place prior to start of any work. Individual shall be provided full authority by the Prime Contractor to implement and enforce the Safety and Accident Plan(s) developed by contractor and approved by Contracting Officer for project use. Appointed Individuals are expected to manage, implement, and enforce the contractors accident prevention plan, environmental safety training and health programs, hazardous waste operations, and emergency response as may be required. They will liaison with the installation Safety office and get further direction on local requirements at the preconstruction conference.

Q15: Specification Section 3.4.3- CQC Personnel of the project specification contains an Experience Matrix Table for the CQC personnel. The table lists a Design QC Manger as one of the areas of expertise needed for this project. Since the project is fully designed we do not see the need for this position. Please advise.

A15: Disregard references to the prime contractors requirement for a “Design” Quality Control (QC) Manager. Government will address design related QC matters, raised during construction RFI process, after consultation with its engineers.

Q16. Specifications section 05 12 00 read as follows: 1.4 AISC QUALITY CERTIFICATION. Work shall be fabricated in an AISC certified Category Std fabrication plant.

We have received requests from steel fabricators to get this requirement waived. As you may know, AISC Certification is a lengthy and expensive certification for a smaller steel fabrication shop and many smaller (and larger) shops do not pursue the AISC Certification. We are therefore requesting that this requirement be waived. We do not believe there will be a compromise in the quality of the product if this requirement is waived. I have previously been granted a waiver of this requirement on the District of Columbia National Guard expansion at Andrews AFB in 2002.

A16: The requirement for AISC certification will not be waived;

Q17. SOLICITATION 2.5.2.2 – Subfactor 1 - Because Specialty Subcontractors for performing Structural Steel and Masonry trades are not chosen until final competitive bids are received (usually the day before due date), would it be acceptable instead for Offerors to provide their Experience managing these types of specialty subcontractors (site engineering personnel, structural steel foreman, structural masonry foreman, and independent third party agency special structural inspectors) with examples of this experience?

A17: Yes, that will be acceptable. Offerors shall indicate experience managing these types of specialty contractors. The resumes for the site engineering personnel, structural steel foreman, structural masonry foreman, and independent third party agency special structural inspectors can be deferred and handled as submittals after award.

Q18. Section 01 32 01.00 10, Project Schedule, there are several references to Design and Design-Build activities that are to be included in the Project Schedule. Specifically Items: 3.3.2.2; 3.3.2.11; 3.4.2;

3.4.3; and 3.4.4. It is our understanding that this project is design-bid-build, and therefore the referenced design and design-build activities would not be included in the schedule. Can the government please provide further clarification on these requirements and if they are included or will be deleted?

A18: Any reference to "Design-Build" or to "design phases" should be deleted. Refer to revised specification "01 32 01.00 10 Project Schedule (R1) - 16 May 2016" which includes strike outs of the non-applicable provisions.

Q19. Section 01 45 00.00 10 3.4.3 – CQC Personnel – As the Mechanical and Electrical subcontractors would employ and provide experienced and trained quality control personnel for this project, could these CQC personnel “directly employed by the prime Contractor” instead be provided by the subcontractor?

A19: The Prime Contractors will be held solely responsible for construction Quality Control. How the Prime Contractor manages, delegates, or shares responsibilities with his subcontractors is a means and methods issue.

Q20: (Section 00110, para 2.5.2.2) Please clarify whether the Government expects resumes, a narrative response, spreadsheets of experience, etc. in response to the key personnel experience requirement outlined in this paragraph. While resumes and experience sheets are referenced in the paragraph, no specific resume or experience sheet template was provided with the solicitation.

Additionally, please clarify if the same description of experience is required for each of the required key personnel listed in the paragraph (Project Manager, Site Superintendent(s), Quality Control/Quality Assurance Manager (on site), site engineering personnel, structural steel foreman, structural masonry foreman, and independent third party agency special structural inspectors.)

A20: Resumes and Experience sheet format are offerors preference. No template will be provided. The following key personnel are required to have resumes and experience referenced: Project Manager, Site Superintendent(s), Quality Control/Quality Assurance Manager (on site). The resumes for the site engineering personnel, structural steel foreman, structural masonry foreman, and independent third party agency special structural inspectors can be deferred and handled as submittals after award.

Q21: (Section 00110, para 2.5.2.2) Are there any minimum thresholds for experience required for the key personnel featured in response to this paragraph?

A21: No, but in the competitive environment of Subfactor 1 experience and capability evaluations, you will be compared against other offerors’ submissions. Be advised that prime contractors looking to shoulder any of these Subfactor 1 listed personnel with the additional duty as the [Specification section 01 45 00 para 3.4.1] “Safety and Health Manager”, otherwise termed by the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) in EM 385-1-1 as the “Site Safety and Health Officer” (SSHO), will require proof of adequate OSHA 30-Hr training and all associated experience.

Q22: (Section 00110, para 2.5.3.3 & 2.5.3.4) Please clarify whether joint venture offerors are required to prepare 3 Exhibit A's and provide Past Performance information for each member of the joint venture or three projects total for the joint venture which represent each member's experience and past performance.

A22: Joint venture offerors are required to prepare 3 Exhibit A’s and provide Past Performance information for each member or company of the joint venture.

Q23: (Section 00110, para 2.5.3.9 & 2.5.3.10) Please clarify whether offeror's are allowed to submit key subcontractor past experience and performance in addition to offeror past experience and performance, or if the intent is to allow key subcontractor experience and performance in lieu of offeror experience (e.g. can the offeror submit three of our own projects, and three of our structural steel subcontractor projects, and three of our masonry subcontractors projects, or will only three projects be considered?) If this is allowed, is it a requirement to submit three projects for each key personnel or subcontractor, or is this up to the offeror? This area needs significant clarification and has severe impacts for offerors to be able to provide a timely proposal as an appropriate response requires that previous clients be able to complete questionnaires by the proposal due date and time.

Given the severity of the impact, we recommend extensive clarification and an extension of the due date and time to accommodate a response on the part of the offerors.

A23: Only a total of three projects will be considered. It is up to the discretion of the offeror to decide if one, two or all three of the projects will be from the offeror, key personnel and/or subcontractor. For example, one project could be from the offeror and the two other projects could come from a subcontractor.

Q24: (Section 00110, para 2.5.3.11) Can the offeror use previously completed past performance questionnaires (in the standard USACE/NAVFAC PPQ-0 format) in lieu of requesting new Performance Relevancy Questionnaires from contracting officers. Many of the Cos that we would ask to complete questionnaires have recently filled these out and we are reluctant to continue to take up their time when we have a completed and signed PPQ-0 form on file for the project. Please note that, if this is deemed acceptable, the offeror would provide the PPQ-0 form with the proposal, rather than having the evaluator complete the questionnaire and provide it directly to the contracting office.

A24: Yes. Refer to Exhibit C1 which states the following, "A completed CCASS evaluation for a DoD project or similar agency appraisal form may be substituted for this reference questionnaire."

Q25: (Section 00110, para 2.5.3.13) Please clarify whether key personnel that were not involved in the projects submitted under this section (i.e. they do not have performance history demonstrated by the exhibit A's provided by the offeror) are required to feature resumes under this section listing past experience or Volume 2 - Subfactor 1 where it appears a discussion of their experience is already required.

A25: Key personnel that were not involved in the projects submitted under Section 00110, para 2.5.3.13 are NOT required to feature resumes for Volume 2 – Subfactor 1.

Q26: (Section 00120, para 2.2.3.2) The evaluation criteria includes a discussion of the offeror's proposed organization and management plan, something that was not discussed under Section 00110.

Please provide clarification as to what the expected content of the organizational and management plan is (e.g. are we to provide an org chart, a narrative management approach, etc.)

A26: Provision of an org chart and a BRIEF narrative management approach would be acceptable.

Q27: (Section 00120, para 2.2.3.3) The evaluation criteria includes a discussion of the adequacy of the offeror's quality control procedures, something that was not discussed under Section 001100. Please provide clarification as to what the expected content of that discussion might include (e.g. does the

Government desire an example QC plan, a narrative discussion of QC procedures, or merely a discussion of previous projects in which QC procedures were implemented).

A27: No plan required for bid evaluation, simply include a BRIEF narrative discussion of QC procedures sufficient to provide an executive summary of means and methods. The QC Plan is covered in the Division 1 requirements and will be due after Notice to Proceed, under the terms of Quality Control specification 01 45 00.00 10 para 3.2

Q28: (Section 00120, para 3.4 & 3.5) Please clarify whether these Past Performance Sub-Factors are used only in evaluating the past experience and performance provided by the offeror or if they have been included with the intent that the offeror address each of them in narrative format or otherwise.

A28: Offerors are required to address the sub-factors in narrative format or otherwise. Evaluators will also consider all types of past/present performance information an offeror provides as stated in Section 00120, paragraph 2.3.1.

Q29: Per Specifications, Division 14, 14 24 01, there is a Wheelchair Lift called for. There is no location for the wheelchair lift shown on the drawings. Where will the wheelchair lift be located?

A29: Refer to Plan Sheet A-101B, Briefing Room 103, and, Detail 4/A-403.

Q30: Are there any general guidelines for content of cut sheets? Typically they provide information on past projects. We are part of an SBA Mentor Protégé with a large business and will be proposing as a JV with our LB partner. Part 2 limits the evaluation to three projects. We assume adding an undefined number of cut sheets is an opportunity for us to provide significant additional detail on a large body of projects from our LB partner but wanted to confirm that is acceptable.

A30: The solicitation states, resumes or experience cut sheets are limited to 2 pages each. Pages in excess of the limit will not be evaluated. The content of the cut sheets is up to the discretion of the offeror.

Q31: Reference Section 00110, page 21/80, item 2.5.2.2 – The RFP requires offerors provide resumes for site engineering personnel, structural steel foreman, structural masonry foreman, and independent third party agency special structural inspectors. Please consider requiring these resumes for the structural steel foreman, structural masonry foreman and independent third party agency special structural inspectors as submittals after award. Our approach is to solicit bids from a number of companies and we may not know up until the bid is due to the government which company’s price we will use in our proposal. As such, there may not be adequate time to obtain and include these resumes in our proposal. To obtain this information well in advance of the bid date for inclusion in the proposal response, offerors will need to team with pre-selected subcontractor(s) to cover this requirement. Submitting this information after award allows offerors to consider bid proposals from multiple, qualified subcontractors and choose the best value for this contract.

A31: At this time, offerors are still required to provide resumes for above mentioned positions by solicitation close date.

A31 (Revised 20 May 2016): The resumes for the site engineering personnel, structural steel foreman, structural masonry foreman, and independent third party agency special structural inspectors can be deferred and handled as submittals after award as requested. Refer to A17 for additional guidance.

Q32: Reference Section 00110, page 21/80, item 2.5.2.3.1 – This section shows an NTP date of 12 August 2016. Section 00120, page 28/80, item 2.2.4 shows an NTP of 22 August 2016. Please clarify which NTP date offerors should use in preparing the proposed project schedule.

A32: 12 August 2016

Q33: Reference Section 00110, page 22/80, item 2.5.3.2 – The RFP requires offerors to use the Exhibit C – Reference Questionnaire for obtaining client reference information. Please consider allowing offerors to submit PPQ-0 forms in lieu of the Exhibit C. The PPQ-0 form contains similar information to that required by the Exhibit C and, as most DOD contracting authorities use/accept these forms in the solicitation process, contractors have these completed and contracting personnel do not have to complete multiple past performance questionnaires.

A33: Please refer to Exhibit C1 which states the following, "A completed CCASS evaluation for a DoD project or similar agency appraisal form may be substituted for this reference questionnaire".

Q34: Has a site visit been conducted?

A34: Yes. Details of the site visit are posted on fbo.gov in the form of a power point presentation and listing of site visit attendees.

Q35: We want to bid on this project as the Prime. Did we have to make the site visit to be eligible?

A35: No, you did not have to make the site visit in order to be eligible.

Q36: Specifications section 05 12 00 read as follows: 1.4 AISC QUALITY CERTIFICATION. Work shall be fabricated in an AISC certified Category Std fabrication plant.

In RFI’s Questions/Answers provided with Amendment 0002, there is a conflict between responses for items A17 and A20, with the A31 response. Please clarify which answer is the correct requirement.

A37: The responses for A17 and A20 are correct. The response to A31 has been revised. Refer to A31 (Revised 20 May 2016) for details.

Q38: In the government’s response to Q28, answer A28 is confusing since referenced sections 3.4 &

3.5 are included in the RFP as Evaluation Factors for past performance. The Subfactor’s in these sections would be demonstrated in either Exhibit C – Past/Present Performance Questionnaires, CCASS records, or other Agency Performance evaluation documents included, therefore no narrative or other information should be required. Please further clarify?

A38: Offerors encouraged to include a narrative or other relevant information if a single subfactor or multiple subfactors are not demonstrated in either the offeror’s Exhibit C – Past/Present Performance Questionnaires, CCASS records, or other Agency Performance evaluation documents.

Q39. In the government’s response to Q7, sheet E-131A, Keyed note 9 requires empty conduits installed between Comm room 131 and the new Antenna Tower. Drawing E-614 General Note 1.e requires “New (CFCI) Cabling…”. Please confirm that no cabling is required, only empty conduits to serve the new Antenna Tower.

A39: The new (CFCI) cabling required in E-614 is required to be pulled into the empty conduits that will be already installed under the E-131 plan sheets. Both the conduits and the wire are required are part of the scope of work. Prime Contractors can more easily divide up the overall workload among its subcontractors should they choose to have one sub install the conduits (perhaps electricians?), and another sub pull the wiring in later (perhaps telecommunications?)

Q40. Reference 3.4.3 CQC Personnel - Section 3.4.3 of the project specification requires the contractor to assemble a CQC organization with specialized personnel to assist the CQC System Manager for the following areas: electrical, mechanical, civil, structural, environmental, architectural, materials technician, and submittals clerk, . The specifications state that these individuals must be directly employed by the prime Contractor and may not be employed by a supplier or subcontractor on this project. In addition, all of these individuals must be physically present at the construction site during work on their areas of responsibility.

In our 11 years as an small business general contractor we have never seen such a requirement and are trying to understand the intent. Having all of these professionals on site and employed by the GC is going to add hundreds of thousands dollars to the cost of the project with no apparent value added.

The elements of work other than the environmental work (which must be conducted prior to demolition) will extend throughout the project schedule. As a result, all of these individuals will have to be at the project site for the duration of the project. In the absence of a JV with an engineering firm, an 8a GC offeror would not have reason to hire a full suite of engineers necessary to provide the specialized engineering staff required by the project specifications. Typically the CQC responsibilities for a project this size and complexity is performed by one qualified individual and the specialized elements of this project would be performed by an engineering consultant.

Market experience confirms that very few 8(a) firms (if any) are able to meet this requirement. Please help us understand the basis for this unusual requirement to have such a large suite of professional A&E staff employed by the GC instead of the contractor using a qualified sub consultant to perform these tasks. As an alternative, we request the GANG allow the use of sub consultants for these disciplines.

A40: The Government is eliminating that confusing portion of Specification section 01 45 00.00 10, namely the entirety of paragraph 3.4.3 “CQC Personnel”, from the contract requirements. This paragraph 3.4.3 is closely related with answers provided in Q18 and Q19. Paragraph 3.4.3 appears to be another remnant of a “design-build” specification mistakenly copied over from a previous unrelated project. All other provisions of specification 01 45 00.00 10 remain in effect. The government will provide updated specification shortly. Repeating the answer given in Q19, the Prime Contractor will be held solely responsible for construction Quality Control. How the Prime Contractor manages, delegates, or shares responsibilities with his subcontractors is a means and methods issue.

Q41. Can we have an extension due to Memorial Day weekend?

A41: No

Q42. In order for us to bid the project and overnight the proposal to you, we need to send our quote out by Friday, May 27th as the mail service does not run on Monday, May 30 (Memorial Day). Would the government consider moving the bid date to allow for proposals to be overnighted the day before bid instead of 4 days prior? We feel this would allow general contractors to provide a better price for the project.

A42: No, consider making use of Saturday delivery services as part of you bid submission strategy.