Attachment 02 - Pre-Bid Site Visit Questions and Answers 01.pdf

Solicitation Number: W912QG21B0002 Title: Repair Runway Pavements Questions and Answers 01

Question 1 Drawing AB117, North Control Shelter – Are we to reuse the existing service meter and disconnect switch? If not, what size is required for the meter base and disconnect switch?

RESPONSE – The service meter and disconnect switch shall be salvaged and reinstalled at new location.

Question 2 What is the ampacity rating for the existing service disconnect at the North Control Shelter?

RESPONSE - 200 Amp services

Question 3 Drawing AB117, North Non-Control Shelter – Panel AS3, is this panel fed from the service disconnect at the Control Shelter or from panel AS4?

RESPONSE – Standard installation of this type of arrestor would have Panel AS3 fed from AS4. There is no indication that this system is any different. This shall be confirmed in the field prior to construction.

Question 4 Can we reuse the existing air terminals and conductor on roof and supply/install new down conductors to ground ring?

RESPONSE – Contractor may reuse the system as long as it meets the UFC requirements (UFC 3-575-01 and NFPA 780).

Question 5 On sheet EA501 Keynote 3 states "Threshold bar shall be gated to lessen tail hook bounce. …” We are not familiar with the term "Gated". Please provide an explanation.

RESPONSE -The center 75’ of the runway threshold bar will not have lights installed but rather have base cans with lids. This is to help lessen the tailhook bounce if a plane proceeds over the threshold bar. The current lights will transition to a gated situation prior to this project and then as the Threshold bars are constructed under this project, they to shall have a gated area as detailed in the plans.

Question 6

Sheet EA511 indicates that we are to provide new Sequence Flasher Fixtures. In order to properly price the new flasher fixtures we need to know the manufacturer of the Individual Flasher Control Cabinets. Please provide the manufacturer of the Individual Flasher Control Cabinets, RESPONSE- Cabinets are manufactured by ADB.

Question 7 In reference to 00100 Instructions to bidders, #6, (solicitation page 11) and taking COVID-19 into consideration, would the government consider an electronic bid submission?

RESPONSE- No electronic bids will be accepted. Bids can either be hand carried to 1 National Guard Road, Columbia SC 29201 or they may be mailed to USPFO SC Purchasing and Contracting ATTENTION LTC James Robinson: 9 National Guard Road, Columbia SC 29201-4763.

Question 8 General: There is no existing pavement section identified in the boring log or on the demolition sheets for the abandoned taxiway and barrier access pavements near Station 110+00 and several miscellaneous pavements to be removed. What thicknesses should be used to price this demolition?

RESPONSE- For the abandoned taxiway, assume 6 inches of concrete and about half of it overlayed with two inches of asphalt. For the barrier house access roads, assume four inches of asphalt.

Question 9 CD102: The demolition sheet shows the Base Bid Taxiway P asphalt and PCCP removal. Plan Sheet CP301 typical section shows that the 6” PCCP remains in this area. Please clarify.

RESPONSE – Typical Section D-D refers to Taxiway P. It is the intent that between Runway 14-32 and STA 6+25 along Taxiway P both the asphalt and concrete to be removed. Beyond STA 6+25 only the asphalt shall be milled under

CLIN 03.

Question 10

CP301: Does the asphalt and PCCP thickness apply to both the Base Bid and CLIN 03 areas of work?

RESPONSE – Yes. Typical Section D-D refers to the entire Taxiway P. It is the intent that between Runway 14-32 and STA 6+25 along Taxiway P both the asphalt and concrete to be removed. Beyond STA 6+25 only the asphalt shall be milled under CLIN 03.

Question 11 CP306; CP307: These 3 sections indicate that taxiways A, F, G & H are required to match existing, approximate 10” concrete. CP304, Section B-B, Note 1 says T/W A & H should be 17” PCCP and T/W F should be 17.5”. Sheet CS114 callout denotes T/W H as approximately 10” concrete. Please clarify. Can specific concrete thicknesses be specified without approximate thicknesses or variable thickness within each of the taxiway pavements?

RESPONSE – Typical Section B-B shall be used for Taxiway A, F, and H. The first slabs adjacent to the Runway 14-32 at Taxiway A and H shall be 17” thick except for the thickened edges that shall be constructed per details and joint notes on CP501. The slab adjacent to Runway 14-32 along the northeast edge at the Taxiway F intersection shall be 17.5” thick except for the thickened edge that is located at the edge of the Runway 14-32. At the Taxiway G intersection, the concrete slab shall match the existing slab thickness (approximately 10 inches) and have a thickened edge installed along the Runway 14-32 edge per details and joint notes on CP501.

Sheet CS114 callout references the existing concrete thickness. This call out can be removed now that there is an asphalt transition between the proposed concrete (first row adjacent to Runway 14-32 and the existing Taxiway H concrete to remain).

Question 12 CS113: Callout at T/W F references Section I-I on CP306. There is not a section I-I in the proposed typical sections. Please clarify.

RESPONSE – Refer to section J-J for asphalt pavement section for Taxiway C and Taxiway F fillet.

Question 13 CS113: There doesn’t appear to be a clear designation between the limits of the T/W G Base Bid work and the T/W G CLIN 04 work. Please clarify.

RESPONSE – The Taxiway G Base Bid includes the first adjacent row of slabs starting at STA 176+70 to STA 181+30. All work southwest of this row of slabs shall be considered work associated with Taxiway G CLIN 04.

Question 14 CP304: This section does not match the cross section on CX315 with the following discrepancies: 7” to 9.5” CABC vs. 7”, 12’wide CABC vs. 10’ wide CABC, drainage layer 4’ wider than PCCP (@ outer edge of underdrain) vs. 3’ wider than PCCP

(scaled), consistent width drainage layer vs. “stepped widths” i.e. bottom 4” 3’ wider than top 4”.

RESPONSE – Refer to sheets CP304 – CP307 for exact limits of material offsets, slopes, depths, etc. Cross sections provide offset/elevations and general thicknesses of each material.

Question 15 CP306: The callout says T/W F and G concrete pavement is to match existing concrete (approximately 10”). It appears the intent is to slope the drainage layer towards the underdrain with the concrete thinning as the distance increases leaving the runway edge. If so, what is the underdrain slope and which edge would be 10”? What would be the PCCP thickness in CLIN 04, approximately 120 feet from the runway edge?

RESPONSE – Section L-L on sheet CP306 shall have the reference to Taxiway F deleted. Taxiway G concrete shall be 10” thick over 6” Crushed Aggregate Base Course. Proposed and existing Taxiway G does not have a drainage layer. The edge of Taxiway G that abuts Runway 14/32 shall have a thickened edge constructed per details and Joint Notes on CP501. The tie in location along Taxiway G shall be match existing concrete thickness which is 10”. The underdrain slopes and elevations can be found on sheets CU143 and CU144.

Question 16 CP306: This section indicates that the T/W F filet is proposed PCCP, plan sheet CS113 & CP105 indicate this filet is asphalt. If asphalt is correct, please verify the pavement section base course(s).

RESPONSE – As depicted on Detail 2 sheet CP307 the Taxiway F Fillet southwest of Runway 14/32 is asphalt. The Taxiway F slabs northeast side of Runway 14/32 is PCC. Section L-L on sheet CP306 shall have the reference to Taxiway F deleted.

Refer to section J-J for asphalt pavement section for the fillets at Taxiway C and Taxiway F.

Question 17 CP304: This section denotes 17.5” PCCP for T/W F with thickened edges at adjacent runway and asphalt pavements. Sheet CP306, Section K-K shows 17.5” PCCP with no T/W F thickened edge at runway edge. Please clarify.

RESPONSE – Concrete pavement along the northeast edge of Runway 14/32 is 17.5” PCCP with a thickened edge along the Runway 14/32 edge of pavement.

There is no thickened edge required at limits of proposed concrete away from the Runway 14/32. Thickened edges shall be installed as shown on the Sheets CP101 to CP110.

Question 18

CP307: This sheet shows matching existing concrete pavement thickness between Sta 110+37.50 and 110+82.50. CP 301, Section C-C shows existing 15” PCCP and 27” crushed aggregate separation layer. Which pavement section should be used for this section?

RESPONSE – 15” PCC over 27” Aggregate Base Course is the existing typical section and shall be used between Station 110+37.50 and 110+82.50 for the proposed section. Existing base material can be salvaged and reused where possible. Additional base material may need to be placed to create grades and slopes consistent with the plan set once the Aircraft Arresting System (AAS) trench is removed.

Question 19 CD102: What is the depth of the sanitary sewer to be removed?

RESPONSE – The existing sanitary sewer is approximately 6’ deep.

Question 20 CS111: This section references Plan Sheet CP307, Section N-N, this shows the section for the AAS access road instead of the area referenced. Please clarify.

RESPONSE – Section N-N on sheet CS111 shall be revised to Section O-O on sheet CP307.

Question 21 00 41 00: Item 001o requires a square yard unit cost. This unit cost would represent 4”, 8” and variable thickness drainage layer. Would a cubic yard unit cost be more accurate for the purposes of this item?

RESPONSE – Specification 00 41 00 page 1, CLIN 001a - CLIN 001p shall be revised to have an estimated quantity of 1 and a unit of LS. Contractor shall be paid based off the submitted SF 1442 form.

Question 22 CG501: Will there be any TRM or sod required for this project?

RESPONSE – Per typical sections all graded areas at a minimum shall require seed, fertilizer, and mulch. Refer to erosion control general note 4 on sheet CG501 for slope stabilization methods for slopes greater than 3H:1V.

Question 23 32 13 14 13: This states “The quantity of concrete to be paid for will be the volume of concrete in cubic yards including thickened edges…” but Para. 1.1.2.1 states “The quantity of concrete will be paid for and included in the lump sum contract price. How will the concrete paving be paid?

RESPONSE – Airfield concrete paving will be paid lump sum minus any deductions based on pay factors per the specifications. The cubic yardage of concrete is utilized to adjust pay factors accordingly.

Question 24 00 41 00: For CLIN 01, items 001h-001p have specific quantities associated with them.

Contractor take-off discrepancies will mean that this total will not match the SF1442 CLIN 01 total. Will the contractor be paid the lump sum quoted in the SF1442 and not according to the amounts in Section 00 41 00?

RESPONSE – Specification 00 41 00 page 1, CLIN 001a - CLIN 001p shall be revised to have an estimated quantity of 1 and a unit of LS. Contractor shall be paid based off the submitted SF 1442 form.

Question 25 SF1442: Should the “Net Amount” for CLIN 0002 be left blank?

RESPONSE – Yes, CLIN 0002 is an informational only line item and does not require a NET Amount Total however; subCLIN’s 0002AA, 0002AB, and 0002AC each require a NET Total Amount to be entered in order for the bid to be considered responsive.

Question 26 32 13 14 13: This section states that $300 per cubic yard is to be used in case of pay reduction. Since the true cost per cubic yard will be provided to the government in Section 00 41 00, will this unit price be used instead to compute potential penalties?

RESPONSE – No. The pay deductions are based off the $300 per cubic yard assumption per the project specifications.

Question 27 32 13 14 13: This section states that the “Contractor shall assume USACE Paving Workshop shall cost $25,000 for bidding purposes, but shall bear all costs associated with the Paving Workshop.” If this amount is exceeded, will the government pay the contractor the additional cost?

RESPONSE – Change to requirements: Contractor personnel will be required to attend USACE Paving Workshop. The Government will provide the training at no cost to the contractor. Do not include the cost paid to USACE for this workshop in the bid.

Question 28 32 13 14 13: Can the fill-in lane test section be constructed prior to government approval of the pilot lane test section?

RESPONSE – No. The initial pilot lane test section will need to be approved prior to production paving of additional pilot lanes. Therefore, the pilot lane test section will be approved prior to being able to construct the fill-in lane test section.

Question 29 32 13 14 13: Can production paving begin prior to the pilot and fill-in lane test sections’ government approval?

RESPONSE – No. Per paragraph 1.5.6, “Do not commence production paving until the results on aggregates and concrete, including evaluation of cores, and all pavement measurements for edge slump, joint face deformation, actual plan grade, surface smoothness and thickness have been submitted and approved.”

Question 30 SF1442: Considering the importance of the timely completion of this project to National Defense and the probability of material shortages, will FAR 52.211-14 be included in this project with a priority rating for National Defense?

RESPONSE – FAR 52.211-14 is not applicable to this project.

Question 31 SF1442: This section states that normal contractor work hours are 7 am to 4:30 pm, excluding Saturday, Sunday and Federal holidays. Plan Sheet GC142, “Effect on Aircraft/Airport Operations”, Note E states that working hours shall be Monday through Saturday, 7 am to 6 pm. Spec. Section 01 14 00, Para. 1.3.2 states hours are 7 am to 6 pm Monday through Saturday, excluding government holidays. Please clarify.

RESPONSE -Once the contractor has provided a proposed schedule, we can negotiate daily work hours. It is our intention to generally make the construction site available to the contractor. With coordination, we can implement a daily construction schedule that includes evenings, nights, and / or weekends.

Question 32 CU151: References Sheet AB221, this sheet is not included. Please clarify.

RESPONSE – Delete note 5 from sheet CU151. This sheet was removed from the plan set.

Question 33 CU151: Can 15” RCP be substituted for the 12” concrete steel cylinder (RCCP)? If so, please specify Class III or Class V.

RESPONSE – 15” RCP can be substituted for 12” RCP. Note 4 on sheet CU151 shall be revised to state “RCP Concrete Pipe to be Class III”. All RCP pipes on sheet CU151 shall be Class III.

Question 34 Will Helicopter Runway 5-23 have any impact or limitations on construction?

RESPONSE-Helicopter runway will remain active but should not impact access to the construction site. Remove equipment from Taxiway P when not being used.

Question 35 The batch plant location lists 30’ AGL as the maximum equipment elevation. Most batch plants require at least 50 feet AGL. What is the maximum height concrete plant that can be erected?

RESPONSE – Max equipment elevation to be revised from 262’ to 360’. This allows up to 98 feet AGL for equipment and batch plant.

Question 36 On 5-6-21 we submitted a question regarding the manhole detail shown on drawing AB222. We have spoken with several precast manufactures and all have stated the design on the drawings cannot be provided with aircraft rating due to open bottom and insufficient amount of rebar. We request the design team provide the correct detail for the manhole.

RESPONSE – Manhole shall be designed per specifications and requirements in Note 1 on AB222

Question 37 Can you please confirm if this is a true Small Business set-aside or if it is a full and open solicitation?

RESPONSE – This solicitation is set-aside 100% for small business.

Question 38 Drawing EA502, detail 1-This detail calls for a 15” can for the inboard threshold lights.

Detail 4 shows a 12” can for the outboard lights. Why are we providing 2 different size cans in the threshold bar? Typically, these cans are all the same size. Please advise as to the desired can size.

RESPONSE – The details are for 2 different types of light installations. Outbound threshold fixtures are elevated, inbound fixtures are in-pavement, and require a snow plow ring. See layout sheets for which lights are elevated and which are in pavement.

Question 39 Drawing EA502, detail 2 – detail is noted as inboard threshold light. Please confirm this detail should read as outboard threshold light detail.

RESPONSE – Correct. Detail 2 is an elevated outboard threshold light detail.

Question 40 In reference to page CU151 of the plans, there is a pipe segment called out between CB108 and (existing) CB #6. The pipe segment calls for “162.76’ - 24” conc”.

Assuming this is reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), can the government please call out what class pipe is being requested?

RESPONSE – Yes, the 24” conc pipe is an RCP. Note 4 on sheet CU151 shall be revised to state “RCP Concrete Pipe to be Class III”. All RCP pipes on sheet CU151 shall be Class III.

Question 41 Please clarify where the final bid must be shipped/addressed to. Is this the same location as noted in line 7 on the sf1442?

RESPONSE –Bids may be mailed to USPFO SC Purchasing and Contracting ATTENTION LTC James Robinson: 9 National Guard Road, Columbia SC 29201- 4763 or they can be hand carried to 1 National Guard Road, Columbia SC 29201.

Question 42 Light base type – please confirm that all light bases on this project are class 1A (galvanized).

RESPONSE – Yes, Light bases are class 1A.

Question 43 EA501 – The threshold cans in the “gate” area are supposed to get a 15” diameter blank cover per Keynote 3. There is no detail in the plans that show whether or not a snow plow ring is required for these cans in the “gate” area. Please clarify or provide detail.

RESPONSE – Yes, snow plow rings shall be used.

Question 44 EA501 and EA502 – The threshold light can details on EA502 indicate a 2” PVC drain pipe to underdrain. The sections on EA501 show the electrical conduits but no drains.

Since there are 49 cans tightly packed in this threshold bar more guidance is needed on how to provide drains for these cans if it required. Please confirm that drains are required for all 49 cans in each threshold.

RESPONSE – The closest light to the edge of Runway 14/32 shall be connected to the underdrain system. Each light does not need to be connected to underdrain system.

Question 45 EA502/Detail 5 – This detail shows a connector kit with heat shrink. Is it acceptable to use “super” or “complete” kits in lieu of standard kits with heat shrink?

RESPONSE – Please complete connections per details in plans. This is the standard detail from the design UFC.

Question 46 EA501, Note 2 – This note indicates there should be no more than 5 lights in a bar before an expansion joint is installed. We don’t see a detail for the expansion joint.

Should this be ¾” thick foam rubber for the entire cross section? Does the longitudinal rebar pass through these joints?

RESPONSE – Expansion joint material shall be consistent with the expansion joint material called out on CP501. The longitudinal rebar shall be continuous through the threshold bar.

Question 47 EA125 – Drawing indicates 1-12c #12 and 2-#4. Drawings do not indicate where these control and power circuits are to extend to. Please clarify destination for these items.

RESPONSE – The control and power circuits are extended the existing manhole/vault that is located to the right of light that has Keynote 1 point to it along the southern side of Taxiway G as you are looking at Sheet EA125.

Question 48 AB301, Arresting System Trough – details show 4” GRC installed (GF/CI). Will PVC be acceptable to install in trough in lieu of GRC?

RESPONSE – No. GRSC conduit shall be installed as shown per detail on AB301.

Question 49 Specification 265620-2.7.8 – this section notes spare parts. Items are listed but no type and quantity is provided. Are these spare parts required? If so, please provide types and quantity.

RESPONSE – At the point no spare parts are listed. Here is what our electrical guy came up with:

3 elevated threshold lights XG (x = blank and g = green) 2 IP threshold lights XG (would increase to 5 if the “gate” base cans are replaced with fixtures.)

2 IP threshold lights RG (r = red, g = green)

Question 50

Drawing AB222 provides the detail for the manholes. This detail shows an open bottom but the specs require a bottom. Which is correct? If the specs are correct, can a revised/correct detail be provided?

RESPONSE – Manhole shall be designed per specifications and requirements in Note 1 on AB222.

Question 51 Specification 337102 mentions directional boring utilizing HDPE pipe, spec also mentions jack & drilling under roads and structures. There is a substantial difference in cost between these items. Which method is desired/required?

RESPONSE – Directional boring is acceptable and preferred application for this construction project.

Question 52 Per the drawings, a bore is required at TW C (2W4”), the keynote for this scope states directional drill HDPE conduits. There are several locations on the runway where ductbank is required to cross (2W4”). Will boring these locations with HDPE conduit be acceptable? If so, we recommend utilizing the correct way to attach PVC to HDPE, fusion couplings. If standard PVC couplings are used, they will leave a lip inside the coupling therefore possibly skinning the insulation and creating a potential fault in the circuit.

RESPONSE – Directional drilling/boring can be utilized at ductbank locations are called out in lieu of direct bury if the contractor would prefer. It was assumed that direction drilling/boring would be utilized where the pavement above would remain in place.

Fusion Couplings shall be used to connect HDPE conduit.

Question 53 Please confirm, RW and TW edge lights/transformers are to be reinstalled with new cans, new fixtures not required.

RESPONSE – Correct. Existing Runway and Taxiway edge lights and transformers will be reinstalled on new cans, but new fixtures and transformers are not required.

Question 54 Please confirm threshold lights, transformers and cans are new.

RESPONSE – Yes. Threshold lights and components shall be new for this project.

Question 55

In reference to all CLIN’s containing “Gilsonite Modified Emulsion Seal Coat” (CLIN 0002AA, 0002AB, and 0002AC), would the government consider a substitution to a more traditional seal coat application? Gilsonite seal coating is extremely obscure.

RESPONSE – No. At present, only the Gilsonite Modified Asphalt Emulsion seal coat product with aggregate is allowed for use on airfield runway pavement based on DOD guidance.