W912TF17R0503 SZCQ139905 SZCQ152910 - RFI Tracker

40 KB Posted May 15, 2017

Attached to: Pease ANGB, Newington NH, KC46A ADAL Airfield Pavements & Hydrant AND Repair Aircraft Parking Apron
Solicitation number: W912TF-17-R-0503
Issued by: Department of the Army New Hampshire Army National Guard

About this file

From the source

W912TF17R0503 SZCQ139905 SZCQ152910 - RFI Tracker (As of 20170515)

Text of this file

RFI Tracker

	RFI Tracker W912TF-17-R-0503: SZCQ139905 KC-46A ADAL Ramp and Hydrant System & SZCQ152910 Repair Aircraft Parking Apron IIIA
RFI No.	RFI Text	Government Response Text	Amendment Number
1	The RFP states “If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies, joint venture or formal teaming agreement, for the purpose of this RFP, each company shall complete Exhibit As and obtain Exhibit C references.” If the JV offeror has 3 projects performed together as a JV, will those 3 projects meet this criteria for each firm?	Government Response: If you performed the projects as a Joint Venture (JV), only one (1) Exhibit A and C is required per project. If you think separate projects are more relevant, it is the offerors discretion to submit separate Exhibit A’s and C’s to enhance relevancy.	0001
2	In order to allow offerors sufficient time to source all the proper suppliers and niche subcontractors, please consider a two-week delay of the current RFP response date of Tuesday, 5/2 to Tuesday 5/16.	Government Response: The solicitation response time will be extended to May 30, 2017, 10:00 AM EST	0001
3	Re: Project No. SZCQ 152910- Drawing CD-202 states existing Portland Cement Concrete Paving (PCCP) is 12” to 14” thick, while Drawing CD-501 states existing PCCP is 16”-20” thick. Drawing C-110 states PCCP is 17.5” thick and Drawing C-501 states PCCP is 14” thick. Please confirm existing PCCP thickness and that all PCCP will be replaced in kind.	Based on historic information and cores, the main apron is nominally 14" thick, and the hangar access throat taxiway is nominally 13" thick. Variation from 12" to 15" may be present. Slabs surrounding existing fuel pits in the southern loop are likely 16" thick with three layers of WWF reinforcement. Slabs surrounding existing fuel pits in the northern loop are likely 14" thick with one layer of WWF reinforcement. Irregular slabs are likely reinforced as well. At thickened edge transitions, the 14" slabs thicken to approximately 17.5".

All concrete slabs (at the new hangar tow way connector, for the IIIA area, and for replacement of slabs for fuel system work) will be 14" thick throughout the project limits with a 6" cement stabilized base course on 14" compacted subbase. At locations shown, provide thickened edges of 17.5".	0002
	4	Please confirm existing joint types and locations of thickened edges within area of PCCP to be removed and replaced.	Existing joint types are not fully known. Thickened edge locations within the existing pavement have not been verified. Per note 11 on CD-501 of Project No. SZCQ 152910, contractor should anticipate that the joint along the northern edge of the apron replacement has dowels epoxied into the concrete to be replaced, that were greased prior to placement of the apron pavement to the north. It may be possible for the contractor to demo the old concrete and extract the dowels. In general: In the northern portion of the apron in the area of the north hydrant loop, there are dowels along the N-S joints and the E-W joints are sawn. In the middle section in the area of the southern hydrant loop but north of the old pavement (to be replaced under SZCQ152910), the joint orientation was reversed, with dowels along the E-W joints and the N-S joints are sawn. The area to be replaced under SZCQ152910 likely has sawn E-W joints and a keyway on the N-S joints, but may vary. The outer three rows of slabs, on the east and west edges, are likely doweled in both directions.	0002
	5	00100, paragraph 11 “Exceptions”, if exceptions are submitted which proposal in what Volume of the proposal are the Exceptions to be included?	Submit the addendum outlining the expection(s) in the volume where the exception applies.	0002
	6	00110,2.4.4 – states all pages are to be 8.5 x 11. The proposed project schedule is best presented and most legible in 11 x 17 format. Can the schedule be provided in 11 x 17 format and if so would the 11 x 17 sheet count as 2 pages?	Yes, the schedule may be printed on an appropriate size paper larger than 8.5"x11". The schedule is not subject to, nor included in page limitations.	0002
	7	00110,2.5.1.4 – states the price form provided in section 00010 is to be included in Volume 1. There is also an Excel Bid Schedule (bid breakdown) that was provided with the RFP documents. Is this Excel bid breakdown sheet to be included in the Volume 1 information?	Yes, include the Excel bid schedule in Volume 1.	0002
	8	00110,2.5.3.12.1 – states that for personnel that are intended to be utilized on this project but are not listed in the past project Exhibit A’s a resume or summary of experience is to be submitted. Resumes for these personnel are required in Volume 2, Subfactor 1. Are resumes also required in Volume 2, Part 2 if they did not participate in any of the Exhibit A relevant projects?	Yes.	0002
	9	Reference specification 33 52 43.13, does the double wall fuel piping system need to be shop built by a manufacturer that has regularly built this type of product (pre-engineered) or can it be fabricated by the mechanical fueling pipe installer?	Subject to compliance with Specifications, there is no requirement for the piping system to be provided by a qualified manufacturer. However, the double wall system and components, must comply with NHDES Application for AST Systems for final approval.	0002
	10	Please provide a detail how the 6 new pit laterals (SS carrier pipe with carbon steel containment pipe) are to be connected to the existing double wall piping mains (SS carrier pipe with fiberglass containment).	The reference to fiberglass secondary containment piping for the northern loop is incorrect, it is carbon steel. The loop with fiberglass secondary containment is the one to the south, which is to be abandoned per plan. There is no location where new piping will connect to fiberglass secondary containment piping. Detail for Tee Branches provided on F-506. These details are provided as a basis of design and should be considered in conjunction. Alternative fittings will also be considered.	0002
	11	The joint construction for the containment pipe as shown on the contract drawings is made with connector bands. These bands cannot be radiographed, please advise as to the non-destructive test required at the containment band welds.	Containment piping and branch connections shall be tested IAW ASME B31.3 and be pneumatically pressure tested per 3.5.2.a. and 3.9.1.1 of Section 33 52 43.13 respectively.	0002
	12	The LPD and HPV containment connections to the mains are made with insert branch fittings which are very expensive. Can this connection be made with a weld-o-let or sock-o-let?	All primary piping fittings must be radiographable. While industry terms may vary, what is commonly referred to as "Sock-o-lets" & "Weld-o-lets" are not radiographable and are not allowed for underground piping. However, some fitting brands may provide products under this nomenclature that are radiographable. Generally, the industry has moved to the prefix of "Insert" to indicate if a branch connection is radiographable.	0002
	13	The soil borings do not provide either the unified soil classification system or the number of blows needed to perform the bore. Please provide this information so we can better understand the scope of the excavation for this project.	The geotechnical report prepared for the project is being furnished for reference. See PDF titled "SZCQ139905 Geotechnical Data Report 20140523"	0002
	14	The Terracon soil boring reports reference in the notes an Exhibit A-3, Appendix B and an Appendix C. This information was not provided with the solicitation documents, please provide.	The geotechnical report prepared for the project is being furnished for reference. See PDF titled "SZCQ139905 Geotechnical Data Report 20140523"	0002
	15	Are lightning surge arresters required underground in the hydrant pits?	No, as stated in 2.1.4.4 of Section 33 52 43.13, Lightning surge arresters are only required for exterior above grade flanges.	0002
	16	Please confirm there is no external coating on the stainless steel carrier pipe and no internal lining on the carbon steel containment pipe.	Confirmed. No exterior coating on primary SS piping and no internal coating on CS containment piping is required.	0002
	17	Is there a requirement for non-destructive testing of field welds for the containment pipe? The carrier pipe is 100% x ray.	Containment piping and branch connections shall be tested IAW ASME B31.3 and be pneumatically pressure tested per 3.5.2.a. and 3.9.1.1 of Section 33 52 43.13 respectively.	0002
	18	Specification 33 52 4.13 permits the use of heat shrink sleeves and tape wrap for underground fuel piping field joints. Is a certified coating subcontractor and a QP5 inspector required if tape wrap and shrink sleeves are used for field joints on the fuel lines?	All Qualifications are required per 1.4.4 of Section 33 52 80.	0002
	19	Is the coater for the shop fabricated double wall fittings required to meet the certifications for either shop pipe coating or field coating in spec section 33 52 80?	All Qualifications are required per 1.4.4 of Section 33 52 80.	0002
	20	Please reference detail 6 of C-503 for projects SZCQ 139905 and SZCQ 152910. Both details depict a bond breaker tape being applied over the joint filler board, then filling the void above with poly patch. The poly patch that is being applied to areas of spall repair should not be bonded directly to the new concrete pavement. Please confirm that a field molded joint sealant should instead be placed in this void above the joint filler board and between the poly patch repair and new concrete pavement as shown in detail 4B of drawing C-503.	ASR Isolation Joint depicts the placement of joint filler board between replacement slab and ASR affected existing slab (typically located along southern edge of Phase IIIA SZCQ152910 project boundary). Contractor shall use similar approach as annotated in Joint Note 1, associated with details 4 & 5, removing the joint filler board to depth, placement of bond breaker tape and using Crafco Polypatch (or approved equal) in lieu of traditional field molded joint sealant.	0002
	21	Section 32 13 11, paragraph 3.10.2 states that repair of previously existing damaged areas will be considered a subsidiary part of the concrete pavement construction. This paragraph is referenced in the airfield pavement specification for both projects under this contract. Due to the length of the existing deteriorated joints, we would ask the government quantify the amount of edge repair to be expected and elaborate on the average depth of repair from the joint face and pavement surface. Detail 5 on sheet C-502 (Replace Aircraft Parking Apron Phase IIIA) shows existing deteriorated joint but is unclear as to the depth and width of the required repair. Please provide clarification on the depth, width, and length of repairs along existing pavement to remain that has been adversely affected by alkali-silica reactivity.	The repairs in question are not currently measurable to the extent that the ASR deteriorated concrete may crumble as the adjacent demolition work takes place. With that, there is no defined depth or width that may be provided with any certainty. Contractor will be working adjacent to an ASR-prone joint of this type for the full width of the southern pavement limit on the Phase IIIA (SZCQ152910) project. The shaded area on Detail 5 attempts to depict the nature of the failure that may occur, but it is possible to minimize or even eliminate this failure and damage through implementing a cautious demolition method and exercising due diligence along this existing edge. Contractor should plan to perform their demolition in this area with said care, to minimize the associated damage, and thereby mitigate the need for extensive repair. The detail is intended to depict the nature of repair that will be required if damage occurs.	0002
	22	Reference sheet C-116 relating to the hydrant fueling and apron work. The note relating to the stop bar states the following, “Continuation of hold marking will be by others under separate contract. TYP.”. Based on detail 5/C-504 the stop bar detail can be completed within the contractor’s construction limits. The note on C-116 regarding the stop bar is unclear. Is the taxiway centerline pavement marking to be continued under a separate contract? Please clarify and/or further direct.	Project SZCQ139905 shall not include any CMA markings. Project SZCQ152910 shall include CMA marking parallel with the western edge of the concrete replacmeent, extending for the approximate 150' width of the replaced concrete. It is expected that new CMA markins will be applied elsewhere to the apron by others under seperate contract.	0002
	23	Note 1 on sheet C-116 states that all existing pavement markings shall be removed with the exception of the Restricted Area Boundary Marking. Does the removal include all associated pavement markings on flight line road also?	The markings on flightline road are not required to be removed and replaced as part of this project, except for markings that are damaged during the course of the contractor's operations or where pavement is removed and replaced shown on SZCQ139905 C-111.	0002
	24	Reference Specification Section 32 13 11 (SZCQ152910) “Concrete Pavement for Airfields and Other Heavy-Duty Pavements” for Repair Aircraft Parking Apron IIIA. Paragraph 1.1 UNIT PRICES states that the quantity of concrete to be paid for will be the volume of concrete in cubic yards including thickened edges [monolithic curb], where required, placed in the completed and accepted pavement. Based on the solicitation documents for Line Item 0002, this contract is for a fixed price lump sum. Please confirm that paragraph 1.1 UNIT PRICES does not apply.	That is correct - the lump sum basis is applicable for this project.	0002
	25	Reference Specification Section 32 13 11 (SZCQ152910) “Concrete Pavement for Airfields and Other Heavy-Duty Pavements” for Repair Aircraft Parking Apron IIIA. Paragraph 2.10.4 Transfer and Spreading Equipment requires the use of a specially manufactured, self-propelled transfer equipment which will accept the concrete outside the paving lane and will transfer and spread It evenly across the paving lane in front of the paver and strike off the surface evenly to a depth which permits the paver to operate efficiently. Given that this project will employ the use of fixed forms and maximum paving lanes will not exceed 150 feet would direct placement from the truck mixer to the lane in front of the paving machine be allowed in lieu of using an MTV? Direct discharge from truck mixers has been utilized on past projects with similar scopes of work. Please confirm that the freshly mixed concrete can be discharged directly from the trucks to the paving lane as long as the sub-grade will not be damaged or otherwise further clarify and/or direct.	Per the specifications, the requirement is for a placement method that 'will transfer and spread It [concrete] evenly across the paving lane in front of the paver and strike off the surface evenly to a depth which permits the paver to operate efficiently'. The specification further requires that 'concrete shall be transported to the paving site in nonagitating equipment conforming to ASTM C94/C94M or in approved agitators. Fixed form concrete shall be transported in approved truck mixers designed with extra large blading and rear opening specifically for low slump concrete. All transporting equipment shall be designed and operated to deliver and discharge the required concrete mixture completely without segregation.' Given these two notes of criteria, we would stress that the emphasis on material placement will be determined by the ability to meet the requirements of the specification in terms of material properties as evaluated through pre-placement and post-placement field testing. The use of an MTV typically provides greater flexibility and reliability to achieve placement in compliance with the scope of work and specification requirements, however, the means and methods of discharge from the transport vehicle to the paving lane can be flexible to allow the method suggested, with the full understanding that the pavement will need to meet all requirements of performance and specification.	0002
	26	Reference Specification Section 32 13 11 (SZCQ152910) “Concrete Pavement for Airfields and Other Heavy-Duty Pavements” for Repair Aircraft Parking Apron IIIA. Paragraph 1.5.6.1 Pilot Lane requires one paving lane at least 400 feet long and shall be constructed to the same thickness as the thickest portion of pavement shown on the drawings. The longest paving section would be approximately 150 feet due to the direction of the existing longitudinal joints. Would 150 feet be acceptable for use as a test lane? If so, could the pilot lane be included as part of the production paving given it meets the contract requirements? The specifications are unclear as to if the pilot lane can be included as the production paving. Please clarify.	If the contractor would propose to use the test lane in a production work zone, the contractor shall perform two separate, 150-foot pilot/test lanes, one on the each side of the apron (east and west). This would enable more thorough vetting of the material and the placement process and allow for additional work zones if the pilot/test lanes are successfully placed and accepted.	0002
	27	In regards to batch plant location, there is a conflicting statement between Specification Section 32 13 11 for KC-46A ADAL Airfield Pavements & Hydrant Systems and Specification Section 32 13 11 for Repair Aircraft Parking Apron IIIA. The specification section for the hydrant system allows the batch plant to be located within 10 miles of the project site off government premises. The specification section for the Aircraft parking apron requires a central mix batch plant to be located on the project site as indicated on the drawings. The drawings do not specify a location in which the batch plant is to be located. Also due to the small amount, less than 10,000 cubic yards, it is impractical to set up an on- site central mix plant. Please clarify if the concrete may be produced for both projects utilizing a ready mix batch plant located off government premises if within ten miles.	The criteria allowing the concrete to be batched from offsite is acceptable for both projects, with the revision that the allowed travel distance be 25 miles (so long as the concrete can be consistently delivered within time limits). Should the Contractor desire to utilize a batch plant on-site, the location would be the contractor staging area indicated on SZCQ152910 GC-110.	0002
	28	The project SZCQ 152910 drawings have varied descriptions of the existing pavement conditions as follows:

a. Drawing CD-202, under the legend column it calls to demolish/remove pavement and related earthwork; PCC-12”-14” thick and HMA-4”-6” thick

b. Drawing CD-501 Section A-A shows concrete thickness of 16” to 20” with 6” existing cement stabilized base and 6” of existing soil cement stabilized base

c. Drawing C-110 legend calls for concrete slab replacement, 17.5”

d. Drawing GR-102 Boring Log No. B-7 shows 14” of concrete pavement and fill below (no stabilized base).

Please clarify for both projects the existing pavement and base depth conditions.

See RFI 3.	0002
29	Drawing CD-501 (SZCQ152910) note 2 states that “ All concrete pavement removal shall be full depth saw cut into pieces small enough to be lifted out to avoid damage to the soil cement and/or soil sub-grade to remain”. It appears that per the new concrete apron section on drawing C-501 the existing concrete pavement, the 6” cement stabilized base and the existing soil cement stabilized base is to be removed and replaced. If this is the case what is the reasoning for removal of the existing slabs as stated in note 2?	The intent is to avoid undermining existing adjacent slabs that are 'to remain'. Reference details, same sheet. Contractor may use alternative methods on interior slab removal where the slabs are bounded only by slabs that are being removed, however perimeter slabs around the work zone that directly abut existing slabs to remain will need to follow these guidelines.	0002
30	Drawing C-501 (SZCQ152910) detail 4/C-501 shows a 6” Cement Stabilized Base course and 14” Subbase for Rigid Pavement. Specifications for these pavement base materials is not included in the project SZCQ152910 specification. Please provide specifications for this material under project SZCQ152910.	Section 32 11 34 Portland Cement-Stabilized Base from Project SZCQ 139905 shall apply to both projects.	0002
31	For project SZCQ139905, specification 33 71 02, paragraph 3.10 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE states that the contractor is to provide concrete in accordance with Section 03 30 00 CAST-IN- PLACE CONCRETE. There is no specification 03 30 00 included in the project SZCQ139905 specifications. Please provide the required specification section.	The reference shall be to 03 30 53 Miscellaneous Cast-in-Place Concrete. Please use the 03 30 53 specification	0002
32	Project No. SZCQ 139905 - Please confirm that the 42”x42” concrete foundation for the aircraft tiedown / mooring anchors shall be doweled back in to the existing concrete pavement as per detail 3 of drawing C-502.	Aircraft tiedown/mooring anchor repairs shall be tied back to adjacent concrete with 1" DIA x 16" Long deformed bars @ 14" O.C. such that each side of the mooring patch will receive 2 bars minimum. Drill & epoxy into the surrounding concrete, with 8" embedment. Provide epoxy bonding agent on face of existing concrete.	0002
33	Detail 3 of drawing C-505 (SZCQ 139905) indicates a minimum concrete depth of 10”. Please confirm that this concrete depth shall be ruled by the typical concrete pavement depth of 13” as presented in detail 4 of C-501.	Aircraft tiedown/mooring anchor patch shall be full depth of concrete, which shall be 14". Reference RFI 3 for clarification on proposed slab thickness.	0002
34	The project SZCQ 139905 drawings have varied descriptions of the existing pavement conditions as follows:

• Drawing CD-203, under the legend column calls to demolish/remove pavement and related earthwork; PCC-12”-14” thick and HMA-4”-6” thick

• Drawing CD-501 Section A-A shows concrete thickness of 16” to 20” with 6” existing cement stabilized base and 6” of existing soil cement stabilized base

• Legend on drawings C-110 and C-113 calls for concrete slab replacement, 14”

• Drawing GR-102 Boring Log No. B-7 shows 12” of concrete pavement and fill below. Please confirm the depth of concrete to be removed and the material to be removed below the concrete (no stabilized base).

See RFI 3.	0002
35	Drawing CD-501 (SZCQ 139905) note 2 states that “ All concrete pavement removal shall be full depth saw cut into pieces small enough to be lifted out to avoid damage to the soil cement and/or soil sub-grade to remain”. It appears that as per drawing C-501 the existing concrete pavement, the 6” cement stabilized base and the existing soil cement stabilized base is to be removed and replaced. If this is the case what is the reasoning for removal of the existing slabs as stated in note 2?	See RFI 29.	0002
36	Drawings C-110 and C-113 (SZCQ 139905) indicate concrete slab replacements of 14”. As per Detail 4 on drawing C-501, the slab replacement is indicated to be 13”. Please confirm if the concrete pavement for Project No. SZCQ139905 shall be 13” in depth or 14” in depth.	See RFI 3.	0002
37	Detail 3 of drawing C-505 (SZCQ 139905) depicts a typical Aircraft Tiedown / Mooring anchor with a 42” x 42” concrete foundation. Drawing CD-203 does not indicate the areas in which these tiedowns / mooring anchors are to be installed into the existing pavement. Drawings C- 110 and C-113 also do not depict areas of new concrete pavement where these tiedowns / mooring anchors are to be located. Please confirm that the demolition of existing pavement and the installation of the tiedowns / mooring anchors are included in the scope of work for the above referenced project.	The locations of these aircraft tiedown/mooring anchors are too small to be discernable at the scale of the pavement repair sheets. Reference Detail 4 - Sheet C-505 for the locations of the aircraft tiedown/mooring anchors, relative to each parking position. There are ten (10) anchors required for each parking position as depicted with dimensioning provided relative to the nose wheel stop block marking location for the KC-46 as depicted on Sheet C-504, Detail 2. Ten (10) aircraft parking positions are depicted between Sheets C-116 and C-118, each requiring the aircraft tiedown/mooring anchor locations as detailed.	0002
38	Please provide a basis of design or specification section relating to the aircraft tiedowns / mooring anchors if they are to be included in the scope of work of Project No. SZCQ 139905.	The basis of design is a standard detail (per Unified Facilities Criteria 3-260-01 Figure B11-14) for aircraft tiedown/mooring anchors with specifications for material requirements covered in the detail and related notes provided on Sheet C-505, Detail 3.	0002
39	Drawing C-110 (SZCQ 152910) indicates a concrete slab replacement of 17.5”. Drawing C-111 and detail 4 of drawing C-501 indicate a concrete slab replacement of 14”. Please confirm if the concrete pavement for Project No. SZCQ152910 shall be 14” or 17.5”.	See RFI 3.	0002
40	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheet Note 5 states, “REFURBISH 4 HYDRANT CONTROL & BALL VALVES TO BE REUSED IN THREE NEW HYDRANT PITS AND ONE TO BE USED AS A SPARE. REFURBISH EX LPD VALVES FOR REUSE IN NEW LPD PITS. PIT LIDS, VALVES, AND OTHER EQUIPMENT IN PITS SHALL BE TURNED OVER TO GOVERNMENT.

Specification section 33 52 43.14 Aviation Fuel Control Valves addresses the requirements for the Hydrant Control Valves (HCV), specification 33 52 43.14 is specifying new valves, there is no direction provided refurbished valves.

Specification section 33 52 43.13 Aviation Fuel Piping addresses the requirements for ball valves in paragraph 2.2 Valves and subparagraph 2.2.1 Ball Valves, this specification is specifying new valves, there is no direction provided refurbished valves.

Discussion with Cla-Val indicates that only control valves 8” and larger are rebuilt (completely disassembled, re-plated, repiloted, all soft good replaced), and valves under that size are not due to the cost for rebuilding exceeds the cost of a new valve. Soft goods kits are available for the control vales under 8”.

Questions:

a. Please specify requirements for “refurbish” as applicable to control valves and ball valves.

a) Requirements of refurbishment are to: replace diaphragm, replace internals, and return valves to an operational condition as stated in Section 33 52 43.14.	0002
40B	b. From a scheduling standpoint the use of new valves may be more beneficial to the project, would new valves in lieu of refurbished valves be acceptable?	b) At the Contractor's option, the Contractor may provide new valves in lieu of refurbishing existing valves. New valves shall be equivalent to the existing as acceptable to the Government.	0002
40C	c. What is the model number of the existing Hydrant Control Valves at Pease?	The model number is a Cla-Val 362AF-8-5.	0002
41	Project SZCQ 139905, the total required leak sensors for the work shown on F-102 would be: 8 HDP; 5 LPD; 1 HPV; 1 IVP; with IVP-3 and IVP-4 for a total of 22 leak sensors. Sheet F-503 Notes 3 states, “Leak Detection sensor for new hydrant pit in 5 row incorporated in project by others. If less 5 Row then 15 total leak sensors are required for the project.

The total required leak sensors shown for the work shown on E-002 would be: 8 HDP; 5 LPD; 1 HPV; 3 IVP for a total of 22 leak sensors.

The total required leak sensors shown for the work on E-100 would be: 8 HDP; 5 LPD; 1 HPV; 3 IVP; 1 HPV (5 Row assumed) for a total of 23 leak sensors.

Sheet E-100, Note for 1/E-502 for HYDRANT OUTLET PIT, HIGH POINT VENT, VALVE PIT (Typ. of 13). Sheet E-100 Note for LOW POINT DRAWIN SENSOR INSTLLATION (Typ. of 5). This would be a total of 18 leak sensors required.

5 Row F-102, E-002 do not agree with E-100 on quantities for leak sensors. At 5 Row on sheet E- 100 there are: 3 HDP; 2 LPD; 1 HPV (assumed, not shown on F-102 or E-002) indicated on E-100 for a total of 8 leak sensors. Sheet F-102 and E-002 work indicated that the following leak sensor would be require: 3 HDP; 2 LDP for a total of 7 leak sensors.

Questions:

a. Are there 23 (E-100) or 22 (F-102 & E-002) or 18 (Notes 1/E-501 on E-100) leak sensors installed?

The statement "Sheet E-100 Note for LOW POINT DRAIN SENSOR INSTALLATION (TYP . Of 5)" means 5 low point pit installations with 2 sensors per low point pit for the total of 10 sensors. A) There are 22 total sensors per F-102. E-100 has an extra unneeded sensor shown in row 5 (the one shown plan south). The low point drain installation is plan south from the last hydrant pit in that row to match F-102.	0002
41B	b. Is the sheet F-503 Notes 3 which states, “Leak Detection sensor for new hydrant pit in 5 row incorporated in project by others, applicable, then if so are there 15 (E-100) or 15 (F-102 & E-002) or 10 (Notes 1/E-501 on E-100) leak sensors required to be provided with the contract?	B) All sensors and pits shown on F-102 are part of the project. Disregard Note 3 on F-503.	0002
42	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheets E501 and E-502 provide details for conduit penetrations at the new Hydrant Pits, Low Point Drain Pits, High Point Vent Pits (similar). Please provide detail for conduit penetration at IVP-4, reference sheet F-502, IVP-3 and In-Ramp IVP.	Conduit penetration into IVP-4, IVP-3 and In-Ramp IVP shall be similar to Detail 1 on Drawing E-501	0002
43	Project SZCQ 139905, There is no pavement demolition shown (CD-203) at IVP-3, how is the leak sensor to be provided with conduit and wire?	The pavement shall be demolished and restored as required for the installation of the sensor conduit and wire.	0002
44	Project SZCQ 139905, There is no pavement demolition shown (CD-203) at In-Ramp IVP, how is the leak sensor to be provided with conduit and wire?	The pavement shall be demolished and restored as required for the installation of the sensor conduit and wire.	0002
45	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheet E-100 Notes 5 indicates states in part, “Electrical Contractor shall coordinate with the civil concrete panel demolition schedule and route conduit within the common scope/mechanical installation scope.”

Section 31 00 00 paragraph 3.2.5.5 Jacking, Boring, and Tunneling states, “Unless otherwise indicated, provide excavation by open cut except that sections of a trench may be jacked, bored, or tunneled if, in the opinion of the Contracting Officer, the pipe, cable, or duct can be safely and properly installed and backfill can be properly compacted in such sections.”

Section 33 71 02 paragraph 3.3.4 Jacking and Drilling Under Roads and Structures addresses the predrilling method or the jack-and-sleeve method.

Question:

Please confirm that predrilling method or the jack-and-sleeve method may be utilized to install the conduit associated with the leak detection system where concrete pavement or asphalt roadways are to remain.

Yes, the predrilling method or the jack-and-sleeve method may be utilized to install the conduit associated with the leak detection system where concrete pavement or asphalt roadways are to remain.	0002
46	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheet F-502, Note 4 indicates that hydrostatic testing of pit walls is required once all “seams, fittings, piping and conduit have been installed, as does sheet F-503 Note 6 (Hydrant Pits), and F-504 High Point Vent Pit / Low Point Drain Pit. Please confirm that IVP-3 and In-Ramp IVP do not require hydrostatic testing or otherwise clarify.	Hydrostatic testing is not required of IVP-3 or In-Ramp IVP.	0002
47	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheets F-503 Section A-A and F-504 Section B-B indicate that a notch is to be provided in the concrete encasement around the 4” piping. Sheet S-902 provided Detail 2 Typical Wall Penetration.

a. Please confirm the 4” pipe size on sheet F-503 Section A-A and provide distance from the carrier pipe to edge of concrete notch.

	a) 4" dimension provided is the requested distance between containment piping and concrete. The piping size is 6".	0002
	47B	b. Is “Dog House” or 2/S-902 to be followed, i.e. is sleeve to be provided and encased?	b) Detail 1/F-503 should be followed, unless otherwise directed by pit manufacturer.	0002
	47C	c. Is Detail 2/S-902 required at electrical conduit penetrations?	c) Detail is not required for conduit penetrations. See 3/E-501 for electrical penetration detail.	0002
	47D	d. Project SZCQ 139905, Sheet F-506 Note 4 is referenced on several of the details, please confirm that Note 2 is to be referenced as Note 4 is not provided, or otherwise clarify.	Internal Support callouts referencing note 4 should be referencing note 2	0002
	48	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheet F-605 Pipe Penetration In Vault indicates “High Temp. gasket”, whereas sheet F-505 detail 1 Vault Wall Penetration indicates Buna N or Viton Boot (Typ) and Mechanically Adjustable Segmented Elastomeric Seal, please clarify as to presence and material requirements of high temperature gasket and then further if Buna N or Viton Boot (Typ) and Mechanically Adjustable Segmented Elastomeric Seal if high temperature gasket is required.	Basis of Bid is as detailed in 1/F-505, but F-506 detail would be an acceptable alternative for all pit penetration locations so long as the Pneumatic Testing requirements of 3.9.1.1 of Section 33 52 43.13 can be meet.
Pipe Sleeves are specified within 2.4.1 of Section 33 52 43.13.	0002
	49	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheet F-605 Pipe Penetration In Vault indicates “Continuously Welded”, where as “1/2” Thick Steel Plate (Do not Weld To Carrier Pipe) is also indicated and sheet F-505 detail 1 Vault Wall Penetration indicates Buna N or Viton Boot (Typ) and Mechanically Adjustable Segmented Elastomeric Seal, please clarify as to presence of ½” Thick Steel Plate and requirements for welding if present.	Basis of Bid is as detailed in 1/F-505, but F-506 detail would be an acceptable alternative for all pit penetration locations so long as the Pneumatic Testing requirements of 3.9.1.1 of Section 33 52 43.13 can be meet.
The intent of the detail was to indicate that the plate shall be continuously welded to the carrier but shall not be welded to the "PRIMARY" pipe to allow for expansion through gasket.	0002
	50	Project SZCQ 139905, Detail 1/S-902, Detail 1/S-901, Details 6,7/C-501 infer that the pit is to be set above the elevation of the pavement, with 1/20 slope from outside edge of pit encasement to pit cover, and the slope of the pavement into the pavement field. Is the top of the hydrant pit, or LPD/HPV pit to be set above the elevation of the adjacent pavement, i.e. more than the noted 1/20 slope?	The reinforced concrete associated with the pits shall slope away from the pit lids at a min slope of 1/20 to the expansion joint to avoid water intrusion. At the expansion joint the concrete shall then tie into general site grading.	0002
	51	Project SZCQ 139905, Details 1,2/F-504 and indicate, “1” Thick Plate to match Piping Material”, which piping material the pipe carrier, or containment?	End connection shall be a CS flange and a SS blind flange to allow for welding of SS penetrations.	0002
	52	Project SZCQ 139905, Section 26 42 14.00 10 Cathodic Protection System (Sacrificial Anode) paragraph 1.3.3 Anode and Bond Wires states in part, “A minimum of 15 magnesium anodes with an unpackaged weight of 17 pounds shall be provided uniform distances along the metallic pipe lines. A minimum of 3 test stations shall be used for these anodes. These anodes shall be in addition to anodes for the pipe under concrete slab and casing requirements.

Paragraph 2.2 Magnesium Anodes states in part, “Install a minimum of 15 anodes on the Pipe system. See Paragraph Metallic Components on Nonmetallic Systems and Typicals for additional anodes under slab.

Paragraph 2.1.6 Metallic Components on Nonmetallic Systems and Typicals subparagraph

2.1.6.1 Metallic Components states in part, “As a minimum, protect each metallic component with two (2) magnesium anodes. This number of anodes is required to achieve minus 850 millivolts "instant off" potential on the metallic area and at the same time not provide overvoltage above 1150 millivolts "instant off." As a minimum, the magnesium anode unpackaged weight shall be 17 pounds. The magnesium anodes shall be located on each side of the metallic component and routed through a test station.

Subparagraph 2.1.6.2 Metallic Pipe Component or Section additionally states in part, “Each section of metallic pipe shall be protected with 5 magnesium anodes. The magnesium anodes shall have an unpackaged weight of 17 pounds.

Paragraph 3.2.6 Location of Test Stations states in part, “Test stations shall be of the type and location shown … Install per drawing locations.”

Sheet CP501 Section A indicates 5 magnesium anodes for each location. Sheet F-502 Plan 1 New Work at Isolation Valve Pit (IVP-4) indicates “Insulation Flange Typ. 3 Places”.

The new piping provided at 4 Row is electrically continuous as it is looped from and to IVP-4. All the piping is located under pavement. The locations for the test station and anode groupings are not shown.

It is understood that an extension of design by the contractor is required for confirmation that corrosion protection for piping systems is designed and constructed in accordance with NACE SP-0169.

Questions:

a. Please confirm that the extent of work provided through specification section 26 42 14.00 10 is applicable to the new fuel line installed at 4 Row or otherwise clarify.

a) The new CP system applies only to new piping installed from IVP-4 to Row 4.	0002
52B	b. Please clarify as to the desired design intent for basis of bid. Is the intent that the pipe provided at 4 Row be protected with 3 groupings of anodes, each consisting of 5 anodes for a total of 15, evenly spaced along the length or run of the added loop (bonded to one pipe)? Or

Is the intent that the pipe provided at 4 Row be protected with 4 groupings of anode, each consisting of 5 anodes for a total of 20, evenly spaced along the length or run of the added loop (bonded to one pipe)?

Is the intent that the pipe provided at 4 Row be protected with 1 grouping of anodes, each consisting of 5 anodes for a total of 5, on the added loop (bonded to one pipe)?	b) Details on CP501 confirm the specification language to provide a minimum of three (3) test stations and anode beds with five (5) 17lb bags each.	0002
	52C	c. Please clarify as to the desired design intent for basis of bid. Is the intent that the provided test stations (5 required) be provided at 4 Row evenly spaced along the length or run of the added loop (bonded to two pipe)?
Or	c) The locations of test stations called-out on F-102 and the CP system described w/in Section 26 42 14.00 10 applies only to Row 4.	0002
	52D	d. Is the intent that the provided test stations (3 required) be provided at 4 Row evenly spaced along the length or run of the added loop (bonded to two pipe)?	d) The locations of test stations called-out on F-102 and the CP system described w/in Section 26 42 14.00 10 applies only to Row 4.	0002
	53	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheet CP-501 indicates Flush Test Station With Removable Cover. Section 26 42 14.00 10 Cathodic Protection System (Sacrificial Anode) paragraph 2.3.7 Test Stations address same. What are the loading requirements that the Test Stations are to withstand when located in pavement?	Covers subject to aircraft loadings must be designed for loadings per FAA AC-150/5320-6. In addition, covers must be designed for 100,000 lb wheel loads with 250 psi tire pressure & a uniform live load of 325 psi for 2' or less spans	0002
	54	Project SZCQ 139905, Section 26 42 14.00 10 Cathodic Protection System (Sacrificial Anode) paragraph 2.3.8 Underground Structure Coating sates in part, “This coating specification shall take precedence over any other project specification and drawing notes, whether stated or implied, and shall also apply to the pipeline or tank supplier.”

Paragraph 3.4.5.3 Holiday Test states in part, “After field-coating and wrapping has been applied, the entire pipe shall be inspected by an electric holiday detector with impressed current in accordance with NACE SP0188”.

Section 33 52 80 Liquid Fuels Pipeline Coating Systems is provided.

Question:

Regarding the provided fuel pipeline cation system, what specification section governs in the performance of the work, section 26 42 14.00 10 or 33 52 80?

As stated in 2.3.8 of Section 26 42 14.00 10, this specification supersedes any other specifications. Testing requirements of 3.4.5.3 of Section 26 42 14.00 10 and 3.1.5 of Section 33 52 80 do not conflict.

0002

Project SZCQ 139905, Specification section 02 41 00 Demolition paragraph 1.9 FOREIGN OBJECT DAMAGE (FOD) indicates that a temporary barricade at the Contractor's expense to control the spread of FOD potential debris which shall include a fence covered with a fabric or as indicated and designed to stop the spread of debris. Subpart b – “Delegated design”, additionally indicates that the Contractor shall design FOD Fence System (temporary barricade) or that a proprietary systems may be used if approved by Contracting Officer, in lieu of indicated materials, provided that general functional intent is met, which is to prevent passage of both windblown items and silt runoff. Additionally, the system shall withstand 80 mph winds.

Sheet CG-110 provide detail for low profile barricades.

Question:

Is FOD Fence System required in addition to the low profile barricades?

FOD control associated with the contractor's operation is of the utmost importance on an active airfield. A project may be successfully completed with the sole use of low profile barricades and appropriate due diligence to airfield FOD maintenance with routine/frequent sweeping and material control. Due to the proximity of the work zones to active aircraft towing and operation, a FOD Fence System is not mandated. However, failure to perform adequate FOD control during construction may necessitate additional FOD control measures by the Contractor.

0002

Project SZCQ 139905, the existing fuel system will require draw down and refill from time to time as work progresses, the fuel system will be completely drained prior to demolition.

a. Is the government responsible for the drain down and refill?

The government will drain the existing lines via pumping from the low point drains. The contractor shall remove residues and ensure lines have been vapor freed prior to work.	0002
56B	b. Is the government movement responsible for defueling prior to demolition?	The government will drain the existing lines via pumping from the low point drains. The contractor shall remove residues and ensure lines have been vapor freed prior to work.	0002
56C	c. Will the government take possession of reclaimed fuel generated by the Contractor during vapor freeing?	All fuel is the property of the government unless declared waste fuel by testing.	0002
56D	d. What quantity of non-reclaimed fuel is the Contractor to dispose of?	Basis of bid shall assume 10 gallons of waste fuel for disposal. Should the Contractor's operations generate waste / contaminated fuel above this amount, the contractor shall dispose of the additional fuel, and shall replace the quantity of fuel lost to waste / contamination. All waste fuel shall be accounted for by the Contractor, and will be tracked in the Government's ledgers for coordination with the Defense Logistics Agency (organization that owns the fuel). The Government will determine if the fuel is waste (not reclaimable) IAW sampling procedures prescribed in TO 42B-1-1.	0002
57	SF1442, block 11 does not state the number of calendar days to complete the work, please provide.	See Section 00700 Clause FAR 52.211-10 Alternate 1.	0002
58	Project SZCQ 139905, Specification section 33 08 53, Paragraph 2.2.1.f requires the contractor to provide new coalescer and separator elements after the flushing and cleaning. What are the quantities and model numbers of the existing filter separators?	The hydrant system has 4 hydrant separators vessels . In each vessel there are 7 coalescers and 2 separators.

Coalescers

NSN # 4330-01-482-7909

Company, Facet; Model # CM100-38SB Separators

NSN #4330-01-7907

Company, Facet; Model # SM100-36FF	0002
	59	Project SZCQ 139905, Sheets CD-203, CD-204 indicate, “EXISTING FUEL PIPE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE AND FILLED WITH GROUT PER THE PLANS. (BASE BID).

Sheet F-501 Demolition Notes 4 states, “4. ABANDON REMAINING CONTAINMENT & CARRIER LOOP PIPING FROM IVP-4 SERVING 3 ROW AND 4 ROW IN PLACE, VAPOR FREE, AND FILL WITH GROUT. SEE ENV-OR-306.14(C) FOR OUT OF SERVICE REQUIREMENTS AND ENV-OR-308.02 FOR CLOSURE AND SITE ASSESSMENT. ENSURE REMAINING ACTIVE PIPE AND CP SYSTEMS REMAINS INTACT AND OPERATIONAL.”

Specification section 33 52 43.13 paragraph 2.4.3.4 Concrete and Grout states, “Concrete and grout for anchors and supports shall comply with SECTION 03 30 00.00 10 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE.”, Section 03 30 00.00 10 Cast In Place Concert is not provided.

ENV-OR-306.14(C) indicates that: (c) The owner of an AST system taken out of service shall: (1) Remove all oil from the AST and all piping connected exclusively to that AST; (2) Secure the AST to prevent unauthorized entrance or tampering so that oil is not accidentally or intentionally introduced into the tank, by means such as securely bolting and locking all tank access points and valves and capping or plugging fill lines, gauge openings, or pump lines; (3) Thoroughly clean the interior of the tank and all exclusively connected piping to remove all sludge, solids, and residual oil; (4) Dispose of all oily wastes removed from the AST system in accordance with all applicable state and federal requirements; and (5) Render the tank free of vapors sufficiently to avoid formation of an explosive atmosphere, and vent the tank to ensure the tank remains vapor free.

ENV-OR 308.02 Site Assessment After Removal indicates that in part (a) After dismantling and removing an AST system, the owner shall assess the site to determine whether there is soil or groundwater contamination, or both, attributable to the AST system if: (1) Any tank, valve, pump, or section of piping was in contact with the ground and did not have secondary containment; or; (2) There is evidence that oil has been released from the AST system.

a. As the piping system has secondary containment, and as the bid documents do not indicate any prior evidence of release, please confirm that the sampling for closure as addressed ENV- OR-308.02 is not required, or otherwise clarify.

	a)Basis of Bid shall be for no sampling.	0002
	59B	b. If sampling is required then ENV-OR-308.2 provides the following guidance: (1) Test pits shall be excavated or soil borings advanced in the immediate vicinity of the AST system, and representative soil or groundwater samples shall be obtained; (2) Soil or groundwater samples shall be obtained from the ground surface immediately beneath the tanks, the test pits or soil borings, and beneath the adjacent system piping; and (3) All existing release detection devices or subsurface monitoring locations shall be sampled.
Please clarify and then quantify sampling if required as applicable to: required number of test pits or borings is any; required sample of soil and ground water; required number of existing subsurface monitoring locations to be sampled, or new subsurface monitoring locations to be provided.	b) N/A. See response to a).	0002
	59C	c. ENV-OR-306.14(C) does not address grout filling of the abandoned lines, and additionally the interstitial space between the carrier pipe and FRP containment piping. Due to the configuration of the existing carrier pipe spacers (spiders) the interstitial space may prove impossible to grout fill. Is the interstitial space between the carrier and FRP containment piping to be filled with grout?	c) Basis of Bid shall be for grout fill of both carrier and interstitial space.	0002
	59D	d. ENV-OR-306.14(C) does not address grout filling of the abandoned lines, section 03 30 00.00 10 is not provided, what are the requirements for the grout fill to be utilized?	d) Grout shall be nonshrink conforming to ASTM C1107/C1107M	0002
	59E	e. Is the contractor expected to obtain, pay for, execute any permits associated with the installation of the new fuel work, or in the abandonment of the existing piping, then if so what are the Contractors specific responsibilities?	The NHDES permit for the fueling system has been approved by the State. During construction, the contractor shall plan for the following responsibilities: Coordination of two inspections with NHDES, with the first being conducted pre-backfill and the second being for final acceptance. At the first inspection, contractor shall furnish tightness testing results to NHDES for review and approval before backfilling the system. At the second inspection, contractor shall confirm the operation and function of all system sensors, etc. to receive sign-off by NHDES. Contractor shall also be responsible for coordinating system registration paperwork and other documents discussed within the permitting package provided with the approval system letter.	0002

This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.

Other files

File	Type	Posted
W912TF17R0503_SZCQ139905__SZCQ152910_-_RFI_Tracker_(As_of_20170524).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 24, 2017
SZCQ139905_33_65_00_REVISED.PDF	PDF	May 24, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0004_(Amendment_4).pdf	PDF	May 24, 2017
SZCQ139905_33_71_02_REVISED.PDF	PDF	May 24, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0003_(Amendment_3)_(Conform_Copy).pdf	PDF	May 22, 2017
W912TF17R0503_SZCQ139905__SZCQ152910_-_RFI_Tracker_(As_of_20170522).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 22, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0003_(Amendment_3).pdf	PDF	May 22, 2017
Pease_Utility_Plans_20161228.pdf	PDF	May 20, 2017
Exhibit_D_Bid_Schedule_W912TF-17-R-0503.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 20, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0002_(Amendment_2)_(Conform_Copy).pdf	PDF	May 20, 2017
W912TF17R0503_SZCQ139905__SZCQ152910_-_RFI_Tracker_(As_of_20170515).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 20, 2017
AF_BRAC_Flightline_Groundwater_Monitoring_Zone_Well_Locations_(2012).pdf	PDF	May 20, 2017
SZCQ139905_Geotechnical_Data_Report_20140523.pdf	PDF	May 20, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0002_(Amendment_2).pdf	PDF	May 20, 2017
W912TF17R0503 SZCQ139905 SZCQ152910 - RFI Tracker	—	May 15, 2017
Exhibit D_Bid Schedule_W912TF-17-R-0503.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	May 15, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0002	—	May 15, 2017
AF BRAC Flightline Groundwater Monitoring Zone Well Locations	—	May 15, 2017
SZCQ139905_Geotechnical Data Report_20140523.pdf	PDF	May 15, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0002	—	May 15, 2017
Pease Utility Plans_20161228.pdf	PDF	May 15, 2017
W912TF17R0503_RFI_Tracker_(As_of_20170427).pdf	PDF	Apr 27, 2017
W912TF17R0503_RFI_Tracker_(As_of_20170427).xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Apr 27, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503-0001_(Amendment_1).pdf	PDF	Apr 27, 2017
Pre-Proposal Conference & Site Visit Sign in Sheet_14 April 2017.pdf	PDF	Apr 19, 2017
Pre-Proposal Conference & Site Visit Meeting Minutes_14 April 2017.pdf	PDF	Apr 19, 2017
Pre-Proposal Conference & Site Visit Slides_14 APR 2017.pdf	PDF	Apr 19, 2017
W912TF-17-R-0503_SZCQ139905_&_SZCQ152910_3_APR_2017.pdf	PDF	Apr 3, 2017
EXHIBIT_C_W912TF-17-R-0503_3_APR_2017.doc	DOC document	Apr 3, 2017
EXHIBIT_B_W912TF-17-R-0503_3_APR_2017.doc	DOC document	Apr 3, 2017
EXHIBIT_A_W912TF-17-R-0503_3_APR_2017.doc	DOC document	Apr 3, 2017
Bid_Schedule_W912TF-17-R-0503_3_APR_2017.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Apr 3, 2017

Show all 32

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.