The RFP Database
New business relationships start here

460-321 Parking Garage

Delaware, United States
Government : Federal
Go to the link
This document has expired, therefore the above link may no longer work.

460-321 New Parking Garage
RFIs responses through 12/28/2018


Reference INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFERORS, Part B. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS, Subpart 4. Evaluation Guidance, Volume I Technical Approach, Section 2 Contractor s Past Performance. Please clarify that the PPQ requirements are to provide at least a (one) project for each of the following requirements: 1) a construction project, 2) a healthcare construction project, and 3) a project that is between $10M and $20M, and that the project does not have to contain/meet all three subsequent items to be considered.

The SSEB will evaluate the degree of successful completion of the recent and relevant past performance identified in the proposal in response to Section 2, Offeror s past performance along with the designated team of subcontractors. Documentation of satisfactory performance of projects similar in size, scope, and dollar value will be considered to have met the minimum requirements of the RFP

Reference the SF1442. Block 3 Date Issued states 08-02-2018. Will a new SF1442 be issued considering this solicitation was not issued on FBO until 11-30-2018?

The solicitation issued is the solicitation of record. No other will be issued.

Reference the SF1442, Block 17. Considering there is a bid schedule with several options, what should we insert in Block 17, just the Base Bid amount or a note to See Bid Schedule ?

See bid schedule.

Considering this is a federal government contract performed on federal government property, will the following items be applicable to this contract and required:
The collection of Delaware Gross Receipts Taxes?
The obtaining of a Business License?
The acquisition of the cash or surety bond equal to 6% of total contract amount payable to the Division of Revenue?

See FAR 52.228-1, 52.228-15, 52.229-3 and VAAR 852.236-91 located within the solicitation

What is the specific deadline for RFIs to be submitted to the Contracting Officer? Under 1.4.3 the RFP states questions must be turned in no later than the tenth working day prior to the closing of the solicitation, which we calculate to be a deadline of 1/2/19. Is this correct?

The date proposals are due is changed FROM: 1/16/2019 TO: 1/30/2019. RFIs are calculated to be submitted no later than ten calendar days before this date.

Reference part 1.7 VETS-4212 FEDERAL CONTRACTOR REPORTING of section INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFERORS. It states a VETS-4212 report is required. Do you want a copy of the VETS 4212 included in the Price proposal with the standard forms, or will a current filing at for the Government to reference suffice to meet the requirement?

Submit a copy of VETS 4212 with proposal. The contracting officer will verify submission has taken place.

Reference part 1.8 VETERAN BUISNESS OPPORTUNITY of section INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFERORS. It states all firms must be registered in the database at www.vetbiz.goc at time of award. Should we include a copy of the firm s online registration in the Price proposal with the standard forms to meet this requirement or is an up to date registration online enough to meet this requirement?

Include a copy of the firm s registration. The contracting officer will verify compliance.

Reference Part 2 - PROPOSAL CONTENT of SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS under INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFERORS. Section 2.1 and 2.2 both state that for Binder #1 and Binder #2, one original and four (4) copies of each, are required. This would be a total of 5 binders (1 original + 4 copies) of Binder #1 and 5 binders (1 original + 4 copies) for Binder #2. However, the SF 1442 in Box 13, part (a) states that only 4 copies are required. To address this discrepancy, what are the total number of hard copies required of Binder #1 and Binder #2?

One original, three copies, and on electronic.

Reference Part 3 PROPOSAL DUE DATE SCHEDULE of SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS under INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFERORS. Section 3.2 states that proposals should be mailed to the address listed in Block 8 of the SF 1442, but Block 8 of the SF 1442 says to see attached delivery schedule. We can find no attached delivery schedule. What is the mailing address for proposals arriving by courier (i.e. UPS, FedEx, USPS, etc.)? What is the address if delivered by hand?
A. Use the following address for both hand carry and E-mail -
Department of veterans Affairs
Attention: Mike White
20 Montchanin Road
Contracting Office, Room 135
Greenville, DE 19807

Reference Part 4 Evaluation Guidance of SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS under INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFERORS. Under 4.1 Evaluation Factors and Submission Instructions, Volume 1, Section 1, part (b), the RFP ask for the resume for the site foreman. Can we assume foreman to mean what might also be called the site superintendent who is the Prime contractor s on-site representative and oversees all construction trades? Please clarify.


Should the Reps & Certs document be included in Volume 1 (Binder #1) Technical or in Volume 2 (Binder #2)?

Binder 1

Article 2.7 on page 23 of 77 of the Solicitation states 2 prebid site visit dates:
12/12/18 and 1/9/18 at 3:00 p.m.
Please confirm the 1-9-18 date is not meant to indicate 1-9-19

The date and time for the second site visit is 1/09/2019 at 3 pm local time.


Q1: Will the VA be soliciting for 3rd party inspections during construction or is that the responsibility of the awarded GC?
A1: Revise specification section 01 45 29 item 1.1 to read, A. This section specifies materials testing activities and inspection services required during project construction to be provided by a Testing Laboratory retained by the General Contractor.
Q2: I see that a Geotechnical Report was prepared by Urban Engineers, Inc. in November 2013.B Is this report available for review?
A2: Report attached.
Q4: Are reinforcing steel cages for the caissons partial depth or full length? Please refer to Section 1 on drawing SB501 where it appears that the cages are not full length but further details do not provide any additional information.
A4: The rebar is to be 40 feet long.
Q5: Are there approved vendors for the fire alarm, security and communications.
A5: The services of Tri-M must be used for integration into the existing security systems. The services of BFPE must be used for integration into the existing Notifier fire alarm system.
Q6: Have any other geotechnical reports been completed in this area?
A6: See additional report prepared by Duffield Associates from 2010.
Q7: Are there any required manufacturer's or a basis for design for the following items; sump pump, floor drains, wall hydrants or hose bibs, or is the intention to use whatever meets the specifications?
A7: Contractor required to meet the requirements of the contract documents. Please refer to the attachment for the basis of design for floor drains, it is critical that this type of floor drains should be used in the garage which is designed for vehicular traffic loads.
Q8: Please clarify your intent for the deduction of "one parking level". Does the partial fourth level get removed or does a lower full level get deleted? If the intent is to remove a full lower level, then are we to assume that you simply intend to remove "one layer of the cake" so to speak, and that the partial fourth level, as designed, would move down one level? In removing one level does the capacity for the elevators to travel this additional vertical distance likewise get reduced?
A8: The intent for the alternate is to remove one typical level of the garage, i.e., the level just below the top tier of the garage.B The remainder of the garage shall remain as is per design.B Note that the entire structure was designed for two levels of future expansion regardless of this alternate.B Such design shall remain as is and no reduction of the garage load-bearing capacity shall be done due to this alternate.

Q9: Drawing states 1.5# pcy synthetic fiber but page 11 of Cast in Place shows steel fibers at 30# pcy. Please advise.

A9: 1.5 lbs per cubic yard of concrete is what we specified for the slab-on-grade and cast-in-place topping and washes.
Q10: Drawing SB-101 shows a drilled pier labeled DP42 near S.E. corner. SB-002 does not list a DP42 on the drilled pier/caisson schedule. .
A10: Here is the missing information:
Mark: DP42
Pier Size: 3 6
Type: A
Vertical: 8 - #9
Ties: #4 @ 9 O.C

Q11: Are reinforcing steel cages for the caissons partial depth or full length? Please refer to Section 1 on drawing SB501 where it appears that the cages are not full length but further details do not provide any additional information.
A11: The rebar is to be 40 feet long.
Q11: Clarification on the caisson compressive strength - the plan calls for 3000psi, however, the specs call for 5000psi. Which governs?
A11: 3000psi.
Q12: The drawings call for Drilled Piers to be filled with concrete with a 3000 lb comprehensive strength. The drilled caisson specification calls for concrete with a comprehensive strength of 5000 psi. Please advise.
A12: 3000psi.
Q13: Reference the SF1442. In Block 10 is states that This contract is for 365 days; 95 Days for submittals and administrative matters and 270 Days mobilized on site. Will the contractor be allowed to mobilize and start Phase 1 work earlier than 95 days after NTP? Considering this is a phased project and temporary parking has to be constructed prior to starting the deck construction, and then demolished at the end of the project, we do not feel like 270 days is ample time to perform this work.
A13: Revise contract duration to 455 calendar days with the stipulation that only 270 calendar days are permitted during which the Contractor has unrestricted use of the west lot. Intent is to limit Facility parking impact to 270 days. Phase 1 work may begin immediately following NTP.

Q14: Reference part 1.23 SECURITY BADGES/BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS of section INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS TO BIDDERS/OFFERORS. Will this level of security badging be required for this particular project considering it is a parking garage and is contained outside of the main facility?
A14: Security badging will not be required for this contract for work taking place outside of the Facility for temporary parking or parking deck construction. Site Superintendent to keep a logbook of individuals working on site on a daily basis. Individuals working inside the Facility to complete tie-ins (electrical, security, fire alarm, etc.) will be required to obtain a badge.
Q15: Reference Contract Drawing CD101 and Demolition Key Note #14. We understand that there is an unknown utility line noted and it is clear that we are to verify the utility line and coordinate with the COR the removal of the noted line. For pricing purposes can the VA provide a standard description for the unknown utility line and the extent of the demolition required? Recommendation: We would recommend that the VA define the unknown utility line as an irrigation line, underground conduit, underground ductbank, direct burial site lighting cabling, water main, storm sewer line, sanitary sewer line, etc., and to remove and cap the utility line 5 foot outside the construction site. This will allow all contractors to price the same work scope for the project.
A15: Assume unknown utility is site lighting conduit. Contractor to verify, remove, and cap utility 5 outside of garage footprint.
Q16: Reference Contract Drawing CU101 and Utility Key Note #2. We understand that the drawing notes the installation of a new 1 PVC water main for service to the parking garage. Specification Sections 22 11 00, paragraph 2.2.B. and 33 10 00, paragraph 3.5 outlines the requirement for Type K copper for the service line from the building to 5 ft outside the footprint of the building. Please clarify if PVC is acceptable or to follow the specifications for using Type K copper to just outside the building and then transition to PVC.
A16: Provide copper piping per the specifications.
Q17: Reference Contract Drawings CU101, E601, and Specification Sections 26 13 16 and 26 12 19. The civil drawing shows a pad for the pad mounted medium voltage transformer along with the single line electrical drawing. Specification Section 26 13 16 outlines the requirement for a medium voltage fusible deadfront air break switch with external operating handle with padlocking provisions. Specification Section 26 12 19 specifies a medium voltage pad mounted transformer with an oil-immersed internal medium voltage switch with primary fuse assembly. Recommendation: We would recommend deleting the specified medium voltage deadfront air break switch since the standard oil immersed medium voltage switch and primary fuses will provide all the necessary switching and protection required for a parking garage and will provide adequate service life and will provide a cost savings to the VA.
A17: Disregard spec 26 13 16. Provide internal MV switch and primary fuse assembly with oil filled transformer.

Q18: Reference Contract Drawing EP101, Security Note 1. We understand that the new electronic safety and security systems installed in the garage shall be compatible with the existing systems currently installed and shall tie-into the existing systems and that the headend equipment is located in Building 1, Room 155. Please provide information (manufacture, model number, & point of contact info name, phone, & email) on the existing systems currently installed at the VAMC, i.e., (a) fire alarm system, (b) emergency call system, (c) CCTV (security cameras) system, (d) access control system, (e) direct digital control (DDC & ECC) system, (f) telephone system (VOIP?), and (g) network switch(s) (fiber & cat)
A18: Fire alarm vendor for existing Notifier system is BFPE: 155 Commerce Way, Ste A Dover, DE 19904, (302) 527-2373.
Emergency call system, CCTV, and access control is Lenel. Our designated VAR is Tri-M: 206 Gale Lane, Kennett Square, PA 19348, 1-800-456-7782.
DDC integration to be performed by Modern Controls, 7 Bellecor Dr. New Castle, DE 19720, (302) 325-6800.
There is no prescribed vendor for phone and network services.
Q19: Reference Contract Drawing EP101, Security Note 2. Please provide the necessary information on the VA Security VAR for the security systems along with a point of contact (name, phone number, and email) for the systems.
A19: VA security VAR is Tri-M. POC is Rob Koenig, 610-444-1002,
Q20: Reference Contract Drawing EP101, General Sheet Note 6. Please provide information (manufacture, model number, point of contact info name, phone & email) for the existing emergency phones currently installed.
A20: See attached cut sheets from Code Blue.
Q21: Reference Contract Drawing EP101, PL101, and PL301, detail 2, Sump Pump Detail, and Specification Section 22 14 29, paragraph 2.1 A I. The power plan details a waterproof receptacle (circuit EPR 11) to feed the sump pump. Specification section 22 14 29 outlines a very detailed sump pump control panel with two separate power sources to feed the sump controller and the alarm panel. In addition, it outlines a requirement for interfacing the controller to the building automation system. Please clarify the following points: (a) only one (1) sump pump required for the two elevator shafts, (b) location for alarm panel, horn, strobe light, silencing switch, etc., (c) requirements for interfacing to the DDC Control System and Monitoring Points for the DDC/ECC system. (d) Specifications and Sequence of Operation for the Control Panel for the oil detection probes. Recommendation: We would recommend a local alarm panel with strobe and/or horn to alert the VA to an issue with the sump pump and keep it simple verses a very detailed and expensive customize control panel with interface to the DDC system. We would also recommend that the VA consider installing a oil/water separator on the sump pump since the drawings detail discharging to the storm sewer system.
A21: Specifications and sump details are calling for a simple package sump pump system similar to Stancor SE50 Oil Minder elevator system with contacts for remote signaling for maintenance personnel.

Q22: Reference Contract Drawing E501, Detail 8 (CCTV Riser Diagram), Detail 14 (Emergency Call Box Riser Diagram), Contract Drawing E504, single line flow diagraphs for CCTV System, Cabling Schedule, Equipment, Keynotes for Security Flow riser, and Specification Sections 28 23 00, and 28 26 00. The contract drawings indicate that this project involves the expansion of the existing CCTV (video surveillance) system along with the typical integration of the new cameras into the existing monitoring and control systems along with expansion of the emergency call box system. Specification Section 28 23 00, paragraph 1.5, Submittals, outlines specific design package submissions for the proposed system design with two noted reviews (four is noted in the text but two (2) are specifically noted) at the 65% and 100%. The specifications also note the submission of a system readiness checklist and a commissioning per Specification Section 28 08 00 (which is not included with the current specification sections). The specifications (28 23 00 2.3) outlines specific control equipment for the system. Specification Section 28 26 00 (Electronic Personal Protection System) also outlines specific design submissions for the emergency phone system at the 35%, 65%, 90% and 100% pre-installation design phase. We understand that the project includes the expansion of the CCTV and Emergency Call Box Systems and that we have to interface the new equipment into the existing systems, but the specification sections have not be edited to reflect just an expansion of the existing systems. It would be helpful if the following issues can be confirmed:
The project includes the expansion of the CCTV (security camera system) system as shown on the contract drawings and includes the necessary equipment (as scheduled), cabling (as scheduled), power supplies, and integration into the existing systems to provide video coverage of the parking garage as shown and detailed on the contract drawings. The new system shall be integrated into the existing monitoring, recording, and control stations as required to maintain system performance and as detailed on the security flow riser diagram.
This is correct.
The installation of the CCTV system shall be by an authorized manufacturer s representative or by the current company which is maintaining and updating the current system (please confirm that this is acceptable).
This is correct.
The project includes the expansion of the emergency call box system as shown on the contract drawings and includes the matching the existing equipment, and installation of the cabling, new security panels (as required), power supplies, and interfacing with the existing emergency call system located in Building #1, Room 155. The new installation will include updating the existing as-built security directories and adding the new identifiers for the added emergency call box(s).
This is correct.
Q23: Reference Contract Drawings EP101 EP104, E502, Detail 1, Fire Alarm Riser, and Specification Section 28 31 00, Fire Detection and Alarm. The contract drawings indicate a conventional horn and strobe system with heat detectors and manual pull stations and fireman s phone jacks. The specifications note a digital voice fire alarm system with manual voice override for notifying occupants (paragraph 1.1 Description). Please clarify the following items:
Fire alarm system shall be designed with conventional horn and ADA compliant strobes with adjustable candela output.
This is correct.
Fire alarm system shall provide remote transmission of trouble and alarm conditions to the main fire alarm panel in Building 1.
This is correct.
Advise if the facility uses a base loop system or a networked system, see riser drawing note for Campus FA Loop on riser diagram (E502).
Networked system is existing.
Please provide information on the existing fire alarm panel, i.e., manufacture, model number, and point of contract (name, phone number and email).
Existing system is Honeywell Notifier. Existing system is maintained by BFPE: 155 Commerce Way, Ste A Dover, DE 19904, (302) 527-2373.

Q24: Reference Contract Drawings E503, Security Door Control Description schedule, Door Details 2, 3, & 4, E504, Security Flow Riser Diagram, and Specification Sections 28 13 00, Physical Access Control Systems, 28 13 16, Access Control System and Database Management. The contract drawings indicate that this project involves the expansion of the existing access control system as detailed on the security flow riser and floor plans along with the security door control schedule descriptions. Specification Section 28 13 00, paragraph 1.4, Submittals has a very detailed submission requirement for submitting system design packages for the 35%, 65%, 90%, & 100% design phase for the project. The specifications also describe the requirements for various rooms, operator console for the system, power requirements, door schedules, cameras, intercom, system configuration, system functionality, software, training manuals, training, O&M manuals, FIPS compliance certificates for system components and software, etc. The specifications provide a very detailed outline for a completely new access control system and not just the expansion of the existing system. Specification Section 28 13 16 describes the installation of a complete Physical Access Control System and Database Management Software for the project. It outlines the specific system requirements for integration and submission of various design packages at the 35%, 65%, 90% & 100% design phases for the pre-installation phase of the project. It outlines the database requirements and FIPS compliance for the system and a specific set of requirements for the system as a whole. We understand the project includes the expansion of the existing access control system as detailed on the contract drawings. Please clarify the following:

Project requires the expansion of the access control system as detailed on the contract drawings.
This is correct.

The system components, submittals, shop drawings, and installation and testing shall be by a factory authorized company which specializes in the installation, programming for the system.
This is correct.
Card readers and system components shall match existing system components.
This is correct.
Existing system shall be programmed, and graphics modified to incorporate the added system components, i.e., additional security doors, cameras, emergency phones, etc.
This is correct.
Please provide information on the existing access control system (Lenel On Guard please confirm) and a point of contact for the current vendor (name, phone, and email) that supports the existing system.
VA security VAR is Tri-M. POC is Rob Koenig, 610-444-1002,

Q25: Reference Specification Section 01 35 26, Paragraph 1.12.B. This section notes that the primary project scope area is a Class IV Risk Class for Infection Control. I believe this is in error and it should be noted as a Class I. Please clarify the Infection Control Risk Classification for the project.

A25: Project is a Class I risk for infection control.

Q26: Reference Specification Section 01 32 16.15, Project Schedule. The specifications outline a very detailed Critical Path Method for developing the project schedule using scheduling consultant. We have found that this type of scheduling is important on complex construction projects, i.e., healthcare and occupied multi-phased projects but we believe for a parking garage that most qualified general contractors can develop and manage an effective CPM schedule which provides the information required in the specifications. Please advise if a contractor developed CPM Schedule would be acceptable or if we need to use a third-party CPM Scheduling Consultant.

A26: A contractor developed CPM schedule is acceptable.

Q27: Reference Specification Section 14 24 00, Hydraulic Elevators. Would a MRL (machine roomless) electric traction elevator be acceptable?

A27: No. VA Central Office does not permit installation of MRL elevators.

Mike white

    1. Home
    2. Articles
    3. Login or Register

    4. Search

    5. Add/Announce your RFP