CHARLES COUNTY GOVERNMENT ITB NO ST. MARK S PUMP STATION UPGRADE

Transcription

1 CHARLES COUNTY GOVERNMENT Department of Fiscal and Administrative Services Purchasing Division Telephone: August 30, 2016 ITB NO ST. MARK S PUMP STATION UPGRADE ADDENDUM NUMBER THREE TO: All Bidders Please be advised of the following modification(s) & information related to Invitation to Bid These modifications, comments, and attachments are hereby made a part of the solicitation documents to the same extent as if bound therein. The due date for questions has passed and the due date for bids remain the same as specified in Addendum 1. I. Changes, Additions, and Modifications to the ITB A. Changes 1. Part I, Section 2.5 Term of Contract (pages I-8) Delete the strikethrough text and replace with the bold, italicized text below: The Contractor(s) selected shall complete the scope of work and all requirements contained herein within three hundred sixty-five (365) consecutive calendar days after start date to be specified in a written a Notice to Proceed issued by Charles County Government, as established by the County and the Contractor, plus any contract time extensions approved by the County to complete all work to a point of substantial final completion as deemed by the County. 2. Appendix 1- Specifications and Drawings: a. Specifications Section A Delete all the following text: Manufacturer 2, Monoflo Series A channel Muncher b. Drawing Sheet C-02 Delete Drawing C-02 in its entirety and replace it with Attachment A - Drawing C-02 Revised (d. 08/30/2016) of this addendum. c. Drawing Sheet S-02 Add bold, italicized text as Note 5: 5. Provide waterproofing at pump station control building in accordance with Section 03481, Article

2 B. Attachments Posted to the County Bid Board 1. Attachment A- Drawing C-02 Revised (d. 08/30/2016) 2. Attachment B- Pine Cone Circle Outfall PGM No Attachment C- St. Marks PS Aerial Map 4. Attachment D- St. Marks PS As-builts PMG NO II. Questions Received at Pre-Bid Meeting Question 1 Question: Bypass pumping, there are 2 effluent lines. 1 manhole is shown approximately 260 from station not shown on the LOD, 1) where is the other manhole, and 2) what disturbances are allowed for pumping 2 new manholes. Response: Please see response to Question 5 below. III. Written Questions Received through 8/23/2016 Question 2 Question: The prevailing wage section is missing classifications such as plumber and carpenter. Please clarify. Response: Bidders are responsible to use the prevailing wage classifications provided in the solicitation. Question 3 Question: Can you please forward the most current plan holders list and a copy of the pre-bid sign in sheet for the above referenced project bidding 8/16 to me at your earliest convenience? Response: The County is unable to directly send vendors bid information. You may obtain the Pre-Bid Sign In sheet from the County's Bid Board located at Click on "Procurement Opportunities" then "Bid Board". Question 4 Question: Spec 11300: Is the platform truck specified in para applicable to this project? Response: Yes. Question 5 Question: 01540: By-pass Pumping: Are the maximum flow rates available for each of the two sanitary sewers feeding the station. Is an existing drawing available showing location of the nearest up-stream manhole for the southern sewer line? Response: The maximum flow rates for each of the two sanitary sewers feeding the existing wet well are not available. See Attachments B and C, County As-built Drawing Pine Cone Circle Outfall PGM No and aerial map showing the southern sewer line manhole. It should be noted that the County intends to clear the 15 easement from the existing wet well to Wintergreen Place along the existing 12 DIP. The contractor will be confined to perform bypass operations within the sewer easement and St. Marks Pump Station property for the existing 18 DIP sanitary sewer line. Question 6 Question: M-02: Do the demo'd wet and dry wells get filled with aggregate or flowable fill? Response: Flowable fill. Refer to Pump Station Demolition Section on Drawing M-02. Question 7 Question: M-02: Is the continuation of the wet well FRP ventilation ductwork shown on any other drawings? 2

3 Response: Wet well FRP ductwork to blower is shown on Drawings C-03 and M-01. Question 8 Question: C-03: Please confirm that the force main tie-in for the temporary by-passing is temporary? Response: The force main tie-in for the temporary by-pass is temporary. The TS&V assembly connection shall remain. Question 9 Question: C-01: Could the "Available Record Drawings" referenced in Note A of the Demolition Notes be provided for quantifying our demolition volumes with the understanding that it is still our responsibility to confirm the information on the drawings? Response: Refer to Attachment D for the as-built for the existing St. Marks Pump Station. Question 10 Question: E-09: Is there a specification available for the concrete pole? Response: Refer to Section Article 2.03.C. Question 11 Question: Are there any domestic steel requirements? Response: No. Question 12 Question: M-02: Is a 16" quick connect required. Not sure they make one that large and not sure what purpose the blind flange serves. Is the intent to use a 16" blind flange with 4"? quick connect? Response: The intent is to use a 16-inch blind flange with a 4-inch quick connect. Question 13 Question: M-03: 3" drain shown in fill station containment area, but no yard piping is shown for it. Please clarify. Response: Refer to Drawing S-04. The intent is for spillage to drain into the compacted sand or gravel. There is no yard piping associated with the 3-inch drain. Question 14 Question: M-03: Does the 3"/ 1 1/2" chemical and carrier pipe get heat traced and insulated above grade? Response: No. Question 15 Question: C-02: Please confirm Detail C-103 is for the new shoulder and Detail C-308 is for pavement repair/replacement. Response: Yes, detail C-103 is for the new shoulder and Detail C-308 is for the pavement repair/replacement across roadway. Question 16 Question: C-02: What material and thickness is required for the gravel areas. Response: New gravel areas, as marked on the attached Drawing C-02, shall be 6 inches deep of ¾ inch blue stone and placed atop 2 layers of geotextile in accordance with Section Question 17 Question: C-02: Normal excavation lay-back for the building will extend past the western and southern property lines. Will this be allowed with adjacent property owners or will additional sheeting be required to keep the excavation within the property line constraints? Response: Refer to Section Article 3.01.A. 3

4 Question 18 Question: Reference spec paragraph 1.4: The bypass design flow is stated to be 3.3mgd, however, if the individual flows for each sewer are totaled, the required flow would be double. Please confirm. Response: Refer to Question 5 response. Each bypass pump shall be rated for a capacity of 2,300 gpm in accordance with Section Question 19 Question: It appears that the bypass pumps will have to be set up on upstream manholes as stated on note 12 on drawing C-01. Please confirm and advise if these areas are available to us and any restrictions that might apply. Response: The two upstream manholes are either within the St. Marks property or the County easement. Both areas are available. Question 20 Question: Sheet piling is shown to be used for excavation of the new wetwell. It appears that the piling will conflict with the concrete slab of the existing drywell. Will you allow us to move the wetwell to prevent interference? Response: No. The Contractor shall demolish existing drywell concrete slab as required to accommodate sheeting. Question 21 Question: The specifications allow existing materials to be re-used for backfill. The geotechnical report states that the existing materials are not recommended to be used. Please clarify whether we are to use existing soils for backfill and rely on the contingent item 12 in the case that the material must be disposed. Response: Per Section 02223, on site material can only be used if suitable. Per the geotechnical report, material at the structures was estimated as being unsuitable for backfill due to the high moisture content of the soils and it was expected that off-site material would be needed as backfill material. Offsite material cost and unsuitable material disposal cost shall be included in the Contractor s lump sum price. Contingent Item 12 is meant to cover offsite material above and beyond what is currently shown in the contract documents. Question 22 Question: Reference specification 13120: The specification and the drawings show systems that are not the product of either Nitterhouse or Smith Midland. Please advise if the products that are manufactured by Smith Midland would be acceptable Response: The drawings and specifications require a building with insulated precast sandwich wall panels, with a form liner cast exterior simulated brick finish, in combination with hollow precast roof planks. To the best of the Engineer s knowledge; the named manufacturers can engineer and produce the structural components of the building system as designed. Smith-Midland would be acceptable as an or equal only if they can manufacture a building system that substantially conforms to the design as shown. Question 23 Question: Clarify the party responsible for paying for concrete and soil testing. Section III 2.8 indicates that the contractor will pay, but this is contradictory to other spec requirements. Response: Refer to Addendum 2, Question 9. Question 24 Question: 02161: The geotechnical report shoring section does not recommend "dynamic installation methods". Does this eliminate the steel sheet piling method specified in this specification. 4

5 Response: No, steel sheet piling may be used in accordance with Section However, Contractor shall make every effort to minimize structural damages to the existing building prior to demolition of the building. Question 25 Question: S-03/02223: Drawing S-03 calls out "structural fill" for backfilling but spec does not define structural fill. Could you please define structural fill? On-site material? Off-site aggregate? Response: Per Section 02223, Article 2.02.G., backfill material below structure shall be Type BRG (Bank Run Gravel). Backfill material around structure, including building shall be crusher run. Question 26 Question: Are there any drawings of the existing pump station available? Response: Refer to Question 9 above. Question 27 Question: Drawing C-02 Pavement Repair/Replace references Detail C-408 on page C-14; it should reference Detail C-308 on page C-13. Could you clarify? Detail C-408 is a maintenance of traffic detail; Detail C-308 is detail for patching. Response: Drawing C-02, Pavement Repair/Replaced hatch within the Legend should reference Detail C-308. Question 28 Question: Page C-02 Pavement Repair/Replace is referencing Detail C-308 Standard Detail for Repairing Utility Trench; the water line under this area has a Pipe Cap/Thrust Block at the right side of the drawing on page C-03, which is outside the LOD. Is the LOD supposed to include this area? Response: Yes, the LOD should include the new 8 water line Pipe Cap/Thrust Block. Question 29 Question: Detail C-103 (page C-11) has a total asphalt depth of 7 Inches; detail C-308 (page C-14) has a total asphalt depth of 12 Inches with a mill tie-in. Are both of these correct? Response: Yes. Question 30 Question: I may have missed them, but could you please let me know the mix requirements for C-101 Driveway Section and C-308 Pavement Repair/Replace? Response: Refer to Specification Section Question 31 Question: On the Write-In form for Item No. 3 (11378 Grinder), It only lists JWC Environmental but the spec section also lists the Monoflo Grinder (now sold under the NOV/Moyno brand). The Write-In Form should be revised to include the Monoflo Grinder as well since it is specifically called out and not listed as an equal in the specifications. Other equipment sections with various named suppliers are listed on the write-in form. Response: Please refer to the above change to Specifications Section

6 ATTACHMENT A 6

7 MBRB CATCH BASIN (TYP) CHARLES COUNTY GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION APPROVED FOR: REMARKS OR CONDITIONS GRADING CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILTS ROADS CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILTS STORM DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILTS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILTS WATER CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILTS SEWER CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILTS OTHER CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILTS THIS PERMIT EXPIRES ON DATE: SIGNED DATE GHD Inc Melford Blvd, Suite 330, Bowie, Maryland USA T F W

8 ATTACHMENT B

9 Page 1/1

10 ATTACHMENT C

11 MH B % % ST CHARLES PKWY MH A ST CHARLES PKWY % MH 6 16 ST MARKS DR % MH 1 MH O % 8 5.1% MH N NOTES: Department of Public Works Date Printed: 08/17/2016 : Feet

12 ATTACHMENT D

13 Page 1/1

14 Page 1/1

15 Page 1/1