RFI_answers_FBO_posting_3.27.15.pdf

Pease KC46 Hangar Project

PROJECT SZCQ139901 & SZCQ139904

SOLICITATION No. W912TF-15-R-0500

RFI Question/Answers: 146-150 & 200-225

NOTE: The final amendment to incorporate all changes will be posted on Tuesday, 31 March by 1200 PM EST, along with a consolidated sheet of all RFI Questions and Answers.

145. Q. Section 259000-4 Section C states all software will have an ATO. The application for use on this project does not have a current ATO. Is the ANG responsible for the obtaining the ATO? If not, will the ANG be sponsoring the ATO effort?

A- See revised Section 259000 1.5.C.

146. Q. Section 259000-4 Section B states the system is to be compliant to AF ETL 11-1. Our understanding of AF ETL 11-1 is that the controls to be applied are the same controls as under a normal DIACAP just not as many. How does this work together with Section 259000-4 Section C (see item 1 above)? Will AF ETL 11-1 be sufficient for obtaining ATO?

A- The software approval process will determine if the system is to be classified as one which requires a full ATO/ATC or a partial, as the specific circumstance of the system installation can determine which is applicable.

147. Q. Section 259000-7 Section J. 3: How will the Air Force Standard Desktop Configuration (SDC) be provided? Our goal would be to receive a SDC virtual image for both the client and server systems.

A- The intent was that server and workstation hardware would be Government-furnished and as such the Contractor would not need the SDC image. However, after further review, a physical server and programming/configuration workstations wil be required, these shall be Contractor-furnished. See revised Section 259000. The SDC image will not be used.

148. Q. Who is responsible for updates to the new BAS system and for what duration? If a system update is applied, after commissioning and the ANG takes ownership, and BAS functionality is lost due to the system update, who is responsible for repair?

A- The Government will perform software updates. During the contract duration and for one year following final acceptance, the Contractor will coordinate with and advise the Government on updates and restoration of functionality should an update cause loss of functionality.

149. Q. If the BAS contractor is responsible for system updates and lifecycle maintenance of the ATO, how long is the lifecycle period?

A- See answer to RFI 148.

150. Q. Will the BAS contractor be able to complete the network installation for commissioning purposes, without connecting the network to NIPR? NIPR connection of system will only occur after issuance of ATO.

A- Though the system will reside on the NIPRNET, it is partitioned via VLAN. Server installation will be done in conjunction with the Governments’ staff. The Government will establish the VLAN to connect the Automation Servers in each facility with the Enterprise & Reports Server in Bldg 145. The Contractor will coordinate with the Government as required to establish the network.

200. Q. Trench Drain Grating – Specification section 221319/2.8/B/7 calls for coated grate finish. Please confirm desired coating.

A- Provide with ACO equivalent E-Coating (epoxy) for rust protection.

201. Q. There are several doors in existing walls that have a call out for a bond beam versus a lintel. As an example: Building 254, Door 11 (in the CTK room) on the Door Schedule (AF-

602) calls for a detail 7 and 11 on AE-507. These details are for new cmu jambs and bond beams. Is it the intent to overcut the existing masonry walls and install new masonry jambs and bond beams?

A- Provide opening support at doors per structural details and schedules. (253: S-520

THRU S-522, 254: S-520 THRU S-522)

202. Q. Bollards – Specification section 055013/2.8 calls for 6-inch diameter, hot dipped galvanized pipe with HDPE bollard covers. Detail 4 on AE-512 calls for an 8 inch diameter, painted bollard. Which is correct?

A- Provide bollards per the specifications.

203. Q. Lintels – General Question: Do interior lintels need to be galvanized.

A- Provide opening support at doors and windows per structural details and schedules.

(253: S-520 THRU S-522, 254: S-520 THRU S-522)

204. Q. Building 253:

According to the plans rooms 130, 132-136, and 138-139 on AE-121 these areas appear to be ACT-1, but the Room Finish Schedule says ACT-2. Please confirm the intent.

AE-121 does not designate between ACT-1 and ACT-2, they are both 24" x 24" Lay-in ceiling tiles. Refer to and provide ceiling tile per the room finish schedule.

205. Q. At rooms 121 & 122 the plans call for a clean room tile, but the room finish schedule are calling for a Gordon Metal Panel Ceiling to be installed in those rooms. Please confirm the intent.

A- Gordon metal panel ceiling and associated grids and attachments, is the basis of design for clean room ceiling. Per General note A on AF-001 the listing is not intended to limit selection of same quality and similar colors, textures and patterns from other manufacturers.

206. Q. Building 254 reads (on the finish schedule & materials list) as if it has an ACT-2 in the Men's locker 16 & Restroom 16A, however the plans shows it as ACT -1 (AE-121). Please confirm the intent.

A- AE-121 does not designate between ACT-1 and ACT-2, they are both 24" x 24" Lay-in ceiling tiles. Refer to and provide ceiling tile per the room finish schedule.

207. Q. Reference: Q #612-Hangar 253 & 254 Drawing SP-301 Fall Protection Plan. The drawing shows two dark lines located within the existing building truss above the fuselage at grid lines C' and B'. No details of this modification are shown. Please provide additional information regarding this modification to the existing truss A-See revised Plan Sheet SP-301 for each project. (NOT SEEN) A- SP-301 now posted

208. Q. Reference: Q #165-Please provide a sketch detailing the cantilevered framing described in the answers to questions 83 and 84.

A- See attached Sketch SK-S-1 FALL PROTECTION SUPPORT FRAMING SKETCH (NOT

SEEN)

A- SK-S-1 now posted

209. Q. Amendment 0003, RFI 181 – The RFI response indicates a revised spec section 028200, however, it doesn’t appear that one has been provided. Please advise.

A- 028200 now posted

210. Q. Due to the recent postponements in the due date of the offer, does the Government still anticipate a May 15, 2015 Notice to Proceed date?

A- The Notice to Proceed date is now estimated to be on or about 10 June 2015.

211. Q. Specification Section 233113, 2.4 F tasks the HVAC contractor to treat the inside surface of duct with a layer of antimicrobial coating. Is the intent of this specification that ALL duct has have this coating? If not, where is this specification applicable?

A- All ductwork shall have the treatment applied to the interior surfaces.

212. Q. Detail #5 on drawing M-504 tasks the HVAC contractor to “provide structural design drawings prepared by a licensed structural engineer for approval”. Would it not be more prudent to have the structural engineer of record provide a detail the HVAC contractor can price? Why would we need yet another engineer on this project?

A- The mechanical equipment specified may not be the mechanical equipment that is eventually put on the job. The contractor has leeway as to where the equipment can be located and therefore the structural design may be different.

213. Q. Please confirm there is NO DUCT LINER on this project.

A- Confirmed. No duct liner has been indicated on the drawings, and it is not listed as a duct accessory in the specifications. If it is mentioned in other specs it is only as a IF-THEN statement.

214. Q. Item #162 on RFI Answers posted 03.20.15 references revised Plan Sheet SP-301.

Where is this revised sheet available?

A- SP-301 now posted

215. Q. Item #165 on RFI Answers posted 03.20.15 references an attached Sketch SK-S-1 FALL PROTECTION SUPPORT FRAMING SKETCH, where is this attached sketch available?

A- SK-S-1 now posted

216. Q. The revised sheet adds a 180kva, 400Hz converter and shows it powered through a 3PH, 400 amp non-fused disconnect. The wiring size of 2 sets: 4#4/0 supports the 400 amp disconnect. The power is to come from panel HP-2. Panel HP-2 is a 200 amp panel (see sheet E-602) and will not support a 400 amp service. Panel HP-2 appears incapable of being upgraded to 400 amps. (Note that the converter for Building 253 is fed with a 225 amp service.) Please clarify or correct the power feed to the converter in Building 254.

A- Bld. 254 Sheets E-601 and E-602 were revised under Amendment #3 (Drawing Rev-

2) to change HP-2 to 400 amp. Be sure you are referring to the current drawings issued under Amendment #3 (Drawing Rev-2) which included: E-108, E-110, E-503, E-601, E-602, E-603 and ED-102.

217. Q. Reference Buildings 253 and 254, Amendment #3, Added specification 263543 – 400 Hz Solid State Frequency Converter. Please provide additional specification information, such as insulation and cable type, for the Aircraft Power Cable Assembly listed in paragraph 2.23.A.

We assume the cable is very specific to the Government’s aircraft and a basis of design manufacture with model number will assure the correct cable is incorporated in all bids submitted. We request information for both the cable and the male connector aircraft plug.

A- Coordinate cable assembly with Frequency Converter Manufacturer selected by the contractor to insure proper controls and a coordinated system are provided. Referenced manufacturer (basis for design) will provide a coordinated system, including converter, cable, connector and hoist. Unitron - 214-343-7515, John Halla. Equal systems from other manufacturers will be subject to approval.

218. Q. Reference Amendment #3, RFI #181: The answer to RFI #181 references revised Section 02 82 00, Parts 3.6 A and 3.6 B; the revised section was not included in the Amendment;

please provide.

A- 028200 now posted

219. Q. Reference Extended Due Date for Proposal and Notice To Proceed: Question: Will the Notice to Proceed date be moved to May 30, 2015 based on Amendment No. 3 Proposal Due Date of April 1, 2015.

A- Reference answer in question 210

220. Q. Proposal Inquiry: Reference Q&A #188, the response clarified a conflict between the 00010 Solicitation Contract Form for Bid Items #0002 and #0008 (Standing Seam Metal Roof Options B/253 and B/254) regarding the requirement to remove the existing metal deck to the structure and replace with new deck material per drawing AE131, General Note B. The current bid form indicates the metal deck is to remain, is a new bid form going to be issued to correct the conflict with drawing AE131, General Note B?

A- Item No 0002 should read "Remove flashing, lighting protection, roofing, insulation and corrugated metal deck, to structural framing, and install metal roof deck, insulation, and standing seam roof to match new addition and replace the existing soffits."

Item No 0008 should read "Remove flashing, lighting protection, roofing, insulation and corrugated metal deck, to structural framing, and install metal roof deck, insulation, and standing seam roof to match new addition and replace the existing soffits."

221. Q. Proposal Inquiry: Confusion still exists regarding the scope of the painting related to the existing hangar surfaces. Please clarify Q&A responses #192 and #193, do the existing wall and steel surfaces within the hangar area get repainted, whether the surface become damaged by construction operations or not?

A- The intent of this project is provide consistent finishes throughout the hangar. Existing walls and structure are to be painted in accordance with the specifications.

222. Q. Confusion still exists regarding the application of the painting requirements of specification section 09 97 13.00 40. Please clarify Q&A responses #198 and #199, specifically what surfaces are to be painted utilizing the paint system in 09 97 13.00 40?

A- Spec section 09 97 13.00 40 describes the preparation, application, qualities, and characteristics of steel coatings. It is separate from Spec section 09 90 00 Paints and Coatings.

Steel coatings are to be provided where referenced in the specifications, including sections 05 12 00, 05 31 00, 05 50 13.

223. Q. Proposal Inquiry: Section 09 67 23.15 - Fuel Resistive Resinous Flooring, the specification indicates the main hangar floor to be white and slip resistant. Is the second coat of epoxy installed in a self-level smooth application over the first base coat of cementitous urethane? Is the slip resistant texture only from the fine aluminum oxide powder in the urethane topcoat or is the slip resistant texture a result of installing the white epoxy and white urethane grout coat over the aggregate that was broadcast into the cementitous urethane base coat?

A- This is a means and methods question. The General contractor is responsible for installing flooring to meet the specification requirements and the intent of the construction documents.

224. Q. Drawings IN-101 for each hangar list "Poly-crete" for the white and gray fuel resistive floor coatings E-1 and E-2. What Poly-crete floor coating system is intended for these areas?

A- Dur-A-Flex Poly-Crete (Gray/White) is basis of design and is not intended to limit selection of same quality and similar colors, textures, and patterns form other manufacturers.

Provide a 3-coat Fuel Resistive Resinous Flooring system in accordance with spec section 09 67 23.15

225. Q. ON page M-501 of the Building 253 documents there is a “Flow Straightener” on Detail #6 “Vertical Inline Pump Detail” We cannot find a spec on this to find out what to carry. Is there a spec that can be made available for this item?

A- The flow straightener on the pump discharge is not required.