Q-A 1.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 12 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- XTLF20-1018
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for federal contract solicitation XTLF20-1018, addressing contractor inquiries regarding the replacement of Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) systems at Vance Air Force Base. The Q&A clarifies specifications and technical requirements across 11 questions submitted by prospective bidders, with responses provided by the government contracting officer.
Key clarifications include: earth embankment may be utilized for subgrade forming and materials above current grade; existing pathways will be re-used and no new ducts are anticipated under full-strength pavement; pre-cast handholes are acceptable in lieu of cast-in-place; PAPI lights must remain operational during runway operations, with new conduit acceptable and L-823 primary splice kits to be used for cable segment connections; the supervisor may fulfill the triple hat role (QC and SSHO) if qualified; AF3064 scheduling is acceptable though MS Project and P6 are preferred; contractors must plan for airfield driver training without government-provided escorts; radios are required only during operational runway work, with contractor option to schedule runway closures; no runway closure devices are needed outside flying hours unless an outage is approved; water will be provided from a fill station near facility 925 rather than a hydrant; and the existing PAPI concrete pad must remain in place after equipment removal. These responses address concerns regarding logistics, scheduling, equipment specifications, and operational constraints critical to bid preparation.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Questionnaire
| COMMENT / QUESTION FORM |
| Project XTLF-20-1018 PAPI |
| All submitted questions will be added to this document once received and reviewed by the requester. Once questions are answered, they will be posted by the indicated date. |
| Question # | Reference Document | Question | Response |
| 1 | Specification 03 30 00 - 2.1 references formwork. Would it be acceptable to utilize the earth embankment for subgrade forming and form materials for anything that is above the current grade? | Yes, it is acceptable to utilize the earth embankment for subgrade forming. | |
| 2 | E501 Detail B - Note 1 References conduits under full strength pavements. Our understanding is that the existing pathways are to be re-used. Please clarify. | This is a standard detail used in a variety of applications. It is not anticipated that contractor will be installing any new ducts under full strength pavement. | |
| 3 | E501 Detail C - Would a pre-cast handhold be acceptable in lieu of a cast in place? | Pre-cast handhole would be acceptable | |
| 4 | E- 101 General notes 1 and 2 seem to be conflicting. We do not believe there is enough room to install new cabling prior to removing the existing. Additionally, our experience with replacing airfield light cabling has been that these cables are difficult and time consuming to remove. Would running new conduit be preferred? | PAPI lights must be operational when the runway is open. Replacing the cable from building 197 lighting vault to new PAPI's will likely have to be done in segments. Utilize L-823 primary splice kits as needed to connect new segments of PAPI wire to existing. There are multiple conduits in each duct bank. Government is not opposed to utilizing alternate conduit. The wire for runway edge light circuits and thereshold circuits was replaced in 2019 outside runway project while PAPI wires were left in place. It is expected that the PAPI light wires would be able to be pulled out and new pulled in with existing circuits. | |
| 5 | Specification 01 30 00 - 1.3.2- Please confirm that the super can triple hat the QC and SSHO role as long as they meet the qualifications of each. | This is acceptable. | |
| 6 | 01 32 16.00 20 - 1.3. Would the use of an AF3064 schedule be acceptable in lieu of MS Project or P6? | AF3064 is acceptable, however MS Project and P6 is preferred. | |
| 7 | Will the contractor need to schedule additional time for airfield drivers training, or will escorts be provided by the government? | Contractor will not be provided escorts by the government and should plan accordingly. | |
| 8 | 01 35 13 - 3.1.8 References the contractor shall provide their own radios. Please provide information for the existing radio system that we will need to integrate into. | Radios are only required if work is bein performed while the runway is open and operational. Contractors are allowed to contact Vance and schedule for runway closure to work on the PAPIs. | |
| 9 | Will the contractor be required to provide runway closure devices if the work is outside of flying hours? | no closure devices needed outside of flying hours. If a runway outage is requested and approved, then closure devices will be required during flying hours | |
| 10 | 32 92 23 - 2.2 - Please clarify if the water provided will require the contractor is from a fill station or a hydrant near the work. If a hydrant, will the contractor be required to utilize a backflow preventor? | The water provided is from a fill station located near facility 925 | |
| 11 | CD-101 - Is there any information on the existing PAPI foundation to be removed? Primarily, the depth? | CD101 keynote 2 indicates that the contractor is to leave existing PAPI concrete pad in place after the PAPI equipment has been removed. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .