Loren Data's SAM Daily™

SAMDAILY.US - ISSUE OF OCTOBER 30, 2025 SAM #8739
SOLICITATION NOTICE

Z -- 623-23-121 Reroof portions of various Bldgs (53.24.1E) Construction (VA-26-00004686)

Notice Date

10/28/2025 3:57:20 PM
 

Notice Type

Solicitation
 

NAICS

238160 — Roofing Contractors
 

Contracting Office

NETWORK CONTRACT OFFICE 19 (36C259) Greenwood Village CO 80111 USA
 

ZIP Code

80111
 

Solicitation Number

36C25925R0097
 

Response Due

11/4/2025 8:00:00 AM
 

Archive Date

12/04/2025
 

Point of Contact

Angela J Waalkes (CO), Contracting Specialist
 

E-Mail Address

Angela.Waalkes@va.gov
(Angela.Waalkes@va.gov)
 

Awardee

null
 

Description

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS VHA Network Contracting Office 19 Oklahoma City VA Health Care System Greenwood Village, CO 80111 CONTRACTOR Q&As Construction Contract Reroof Various Bldgs Question No. 1: Firms shall be properly licensed and bonded to perform general contracting work in the State of Oklahoma or have equivalent licensing and be approved for such work by the Veteran s Administration. The Contractor shall be properly licensed and bonded to perform general contracting work in the State of Oklahoma or have equivalent licensing and be approved for such work by the Veteran s Administration. Is this a special requirement for the state of Oklahoma? Because it is a federal project, would we be permitted to proceed without the license? If it is required, is it acceptable for a subcontract teaming partner to hold the GC License? Would a roofing contractor who is properly licensed and bonded in the State of California be considered qualified for this project, or would they be required to hold a license in the State of Oklahoma? Would a general contractor who is properly licensed and bonded in the State of Arizona be considered qualified for this project, or would they also be required to hold a license in the State of Oklahoma? Answer No. 1: No, No. A team agreement would be needed. Other states are acceptable. Other states are acceptable. Question No. 2: Please clarify certification requirements (CVE vs SBA). Answer No. 2: This is a competitive requirement, set aside 100% for Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB). See VAAR 852.219-73, VA Notice of Total Set-Aside for Verified Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business for information in regard to requirements in order to be considered. Offerors must be both VISIBLE and VERIFIED by the Small Business Administration (SBA) prior to proposal receipt through contract completion. Question No. 3: I m preparing our proposal for Solicitation 36C25925R0097. SF 1442 states proposals are due October 22, 2025, at 10:00 AM CT, while Section I.5B states October 2, 2025 at 10:00 AM MT. Could you please confirm the official due date/time and time zone? Answer No. 3: Official proposal due date is October 22nd at 10:00 AM CT however solicitation amendment 0001 extends the proposal due date to October 30, 2025, at 10:00 AM CT. Solicitation amendment 0002 extends the proposal due date to November 4, 2025 at 10:00 AM CT. Question No. 4: Can the project superintendent be the QC Manager and SSHO on this project? Answer No. 4: Yes, as long as this person has the proper certifications. Question No. 5: What are the work hours for this project? Answer No. 5: The hospital is open from 0700-1630 M-F. Anything outside these times will have to be set up with the COR. Question No. 6: How is the VA expecting material to be delivered if we can set up a crane? Answer No. 6: OSHA standards, specifically 29 CFR 1926 Subpart CC, require that crane loads should not be hoisted over occupied buildings, but if unavoidable, the path over the building must be cleared, or alternative protective measures like a 300 psf rated overhead protection must be in place. It is up to the contractor to come up with ideas to get the material to the roof. There are large JLG telehandler types of equipment that could reach for bldg. 24. Question No. 7: Can the VA provide an asbestos report for the roof? Please provide an asbestos survey for this project. Answer No. 7: See Design Narrative Environmental attachment to solicitation amendment P0001 Question No. 8: Can the VA confirm that the drawings show more than what is called out in the SOW and we are to follow the SOW and use drawings as reference to what is required in the SOW? Answer No. 8: The SOW is a summary of the drawings and specs. No work on 52 or 53 due to outside forces, and 52 has already been complete. Question No. 9: The Project Documents indicate elements that have been removed from the scope of work. Is there any railing work? What is the intent of the ICRA drawings on page GI002? Answer No. 9: Yes, but not limited to AE501-image 9 ICRA may be needed when closing up the holes in roof for 1E and running the overflows drains. Question No. 10: Given that crane usage is not permitted, would a 360-degree, 110-foot reach telehandler be an acceptable alternative for the roof, which is approximately 60 feet high? Answer No. 10: Yes, as long as you are not exceeding the weight limit of the telehandler and have a license to operate it. Question No. 11: Where is the allowed laydown area? Answer No. 11: As per the Statement of Work: Contractor shall store all materials offsite and only bring in up to 3 days worth of material on site to be placed on the roof being worked on. Question No. 12: Dumpsters Where is the location for the dumpster allowed? Is there any requirement for a trash chute? Are we permitted to leave enclosed dumpsters next to the building in the work area? Answer No. 12: A covered dumpster will be allowed on location. See VA 14 91 82 attachment to solicitation amendment P0001 This will depend on final area of work but mostly, yes. Question No. 13: What is the intent for moving materials? By hand through the hospital? Answer No. 13: It is up to the contractor to come up with ideas to get the material to the roof. There were large JLG that had the reach for bldg. 24. Question No. 14: Do all the existing roof drains operate effectively? Our concern would be liability for any existing issues. Answer No. 14: Yes, the roof drains operate effectively. Question No. 15: Does the scope intend for all roof drain piping to be replaced on existing drains (i.e. P-600)? Answer No. 15: The primary drain will be replaced; all roof drain hardware, rings, gutters, and downspouts down to cast iron pipe, and a new secondary drain will be installed. Question No. 16: GH-1 and GH-2 confirm that the VA provides equipment and installation. Answer No. 16: The contractor will provide and install that equipment. Question No. 17: Do we need to figure in new counter balanced backdraft for the exhaust fan? Answer No. 17: Yes Question No. 18: Can the VA provide a price/cost schedule for this project? Answer No. 18: Included in solicitation amendment P0001. Question No. 19: Do we need to provide the Att-5 Prime and Subcontractor Construction Breakdown? Answer No. 19: Yes Question No. 20: Please confirm if the entirety of Building 24's roof is considered to contain asbestos. Answer No. 20: See Design Narrative Environmental attachment to solicitation amendment P0001. Question No. 21: Are we allowed to implement a two-shift work schedule: a night shift for removal and a day shift for roof installation? We anticipate minimal noise from the day crew as it will be an adhered system. Answer No. 21: The hospital is open from 0700-1630 M-F. Anything outside these times will have to be set up with the COR. Question No. 22: Neither Roof 24 nor Roof 1E currently has a lightning protection system. Will a new lightning protection system be added as part of this project? Answer No. 22: Yes Question No. 23: If lightning protection is required, is certification of the entire system including design, installation, grounding, bonding, and as-built documentation also required? Answer No. 23: Yes Question No. 24: Since we were not allowed to perform core tests on the roof, we require information on the total height of the existing roof system. Answer No. 24: Both 24 and 1E are estimated to be currently 12 inches thick. All dimensions are approximate Question No. 25: Will all mechanical units be tested prior to roof demolition to ensure they are in working order? Answer No. 25: Contractor will need the get the pre-balance before replacing the equipment. Question No. 26: Adding an average R33 insulation and taper system may create height issues at door access points due to existing low clearances. Should we exclude door height adjustments from our scope? Answer No. 26: No Question No. 27: Please identify what areas of the roof will require the handrails that are detailed on the plans. Answer No. 27: AE501-image 9 Question No. 28: Please add 10 working days to the due date of this project once RFI questions have been answered to give the contractor time to incorporate the information into their proposals. Answer No. 28: In accordance with solicitation amendment P0001; proposals are now due on 10/30/2025. Question No. 29: Does the SSHO (Site Safety Health Officer) need to be directly employed by the Prime Contractor? Must they always be on site? Answer No. 29: A SSHO needs to be on site when all workers are present and have authority of those contractors. Question No. 30: Are there any other mandatory on-site roles required in this contract? Answer No. 30: None that has not been listed. Question No. 31: Are there any concerns regarding Asbestos Containing Material or Lead in the areas being worked in? Answer No. 31: Refer to answer Question No. 7. Question No. 32: When does the VA expect to make an award for this project? Answer No. 32: As soon as practicable. Question No. 33: When does the VA expect the project to start following the award? Answer No. 33: That will depend on several factors to include, when the project is funded, site availability, and weather conditions, to name a few, but as soon as practicable. Question No. 34: Can the VA provide any additional site visit(s)? Answer No. 34: Unfortunately, the VA does not have the manpower to add an additional site visit. Question No. 35: We understand the VA is requesting previously utilized PPQs not be submitted. However, in our experience, CS/COs/CORs do not want to fill out PPQs more than once for a project. Would the VA reconsider evaluating PPQs from previously submitted proposals? Answer No. 35: The solicitation states, IF THERE IS NOT A PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IN PPIRS or FAPPIIS, then the offeror shall submit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) for each project. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. This does not state you can t submit previously submitted PPQs, it states you can t reference them in your proposal and then not include them. If the offeror is having a difficult time getting the PPQ filled out by a CS/CO/COR, If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). You must make sure the information is current and correct so we are able to contact the evaluator. Question No. 36: Considering this is an outdoor roofing project, can the VA specifically advise what ICRA requirements will need to be maintained? Answer No. 36: There are two rooms inside the hospital that need a secondary drain ran. Those rooms shall have a zipper barrier with negative air pressure with 24-hour monitoring and recording, along with a sticky floor mat. All material carried through the hospital shall be covered. It will have Level 1 and Level 2 controls methods in the document attached. See attachment EOVAHCS ICRA v2 attached to solicitation amendment P0001. Question No. 37: Are the Exhaust Fans intended to be grease fans? Answer No. 37: That depends on the fans the contractor provides. Should that fan require grease on a maintains interval, so be it. The main intent is to have direct drives to replace belts. Question No. 38: Is the VA wanting separate VFDs mounted in the space or just a VFD mounted in the fan for balancing with possibility of external signal capability? Answer No. 38: Either of the above will be sufficient. Question No. 39: For Past Performances submitted, will the VA accept project examples that are on-going and over 75% completion? Answer No. 39: No, the project must have been completed. Question No. 40: For Past Performances submitted, will the VA accept project examples that are 6 years completed to the time of the solicitation due date? Answer No. 40: No Question No. 41: Follow-up question on the requirement for a General Contractor license. The state of Oklahoma does not issue, nor require a General Contractor license. See below screenshot from the official State of Oklahoma website. We respectfully request the removal of this requirement since it s impossible to meet. We recommend adding a requirement for proper licensing of specialty trade subcontractors proposed by the General Contractor. Answer No. 41: Since General Contractors are not currently required to have a state license in Oklahoma for general contracting. However, trade licenses/registrations are required for performing, or offering to perform, licensed/registered trade work. In this case a registered roofing contractor will be required for those that are from Oklahoma and the like states. Those from states that have a general contractor license would be able to use that license as well. Question No. 42: Follow up to Question No. 16: GH-1 and GH-2 confirm that the VA provides equipment and installation. Answer No. 16: The contractor will provide and install that equipment. Follow up for RFI 16 Can the VA provide additional information on the GH-1 and GH-2 as what they are expecting to have installed? The Drawings and Specifications are not clear. Answer No. 42: The equipment has been sized per the Fan Schedule (EF/RF/SF) on Sheet M-600. Pre-TAB serves as a baseline for rebalancing the new equipment. Question No. 43: Follow up to Question #25 discusses pre tab on mechanical equipment. Do we need to raise any of the RTUs? Is so do we need to cover a pre and post TAB on them? Answer No. 43: Currently RTU does not need to be raised. But pre and post tab do need to be completed due to things that might have been changed since these units have been installed. Question No. 44: Will we need to adjust the Vent piping heights with the new roofing going on or will we be able to leave existing? Answer No. 44: Yes, the height will need to be adjusted. Specs were calling for 8 inches above the top of the roof. Question No. 45: When reviewing the detail for the manufacturer Guardrail drawings, the post is segmented from the base and plate above the roof insulation and TPO membrane, this may allow for water to intrusion into the building at the connection point. Will the design team consider a counterweight ballasted safety railing that sits on top of the roof membrane system or is the roof penetrating system required? Project Drawings specify that the Contractor shall furnish and install a guardrail system which penetrates the roofing system and anchors under the deck. Utilizing such a system creates dozens of unnecessary penetrations that could allow water infiltration into the roof deck if not properly maintained. Would the Government be willing to consider a non-penetrating guardrail system? Answer No. 45: We will consider it, as long as the/an engineering firm signs off on it. Remember this is a guard rail, there are certain requirements and forces each post needs to be able to withstand. It is not a post with a chain to look pretty to stop safety from yelling at you. Question No. 46: Metal Decking Repairs: The specification and drawing require puddle welds for the metal repairs, these can burn through the deck at create a weak point at the weld locations, Can the metal decking overlay repairs be mechanically fastened instead of welding the new decking? Answer No. 46: 05 31 00 specs call for puddle welds, the specs rules all. To answer your question: No, a fluted form deck shall be supported by welding. Question No. 47: Reference Detail 3/SF501: This detail calls for B-Decking across openings and shows concrete infill. Note 3 on this detail calls for, Infill w/ concrete or foam to match existing surface elevation . Please confirm: Please confirm foam is meant to describe polyiso insulation? Can the entirety of the infill, above the B-deck, be comprised of insulation/foam infill? If not, please confirm what the minimum required concrete depth of the infill should be (with it being understood that insulation/foam would then be added to match heights in each area)? Answer No. 47: The spec on 07 22 00 call is Polyisocyanurate-Foam Board for the full name. No The concrete depth will be the same as the rest of the concrete the rebar is attaching to. Question No. 48: Is there water access on the roof to decrease the release of dust and asbestos particles during abatement? Answer No. 48: Yes, but the contractor will need to provide the hose(s). Question No. 49: Is there Applied Fireproofing on the underside of any of the roof decks within the scope of work area? Answer No. 49: Yes, there is fire caulking for any penetration. Question No. 50: Will Applied Fireproofing being required to be installed on the underside of any of the deck infill areas. If so, please provide details and specifications for such fireproofing. Including, but not limited to: If this can be intumescent coating or if it is a spray applied mineral product. Fire rating for assembly (i.e. 45 min, 1-hr, 2-hr, etc.). Inspection / certification requirements. Answer No. 50: 07 22 00 in the specs, but No on the underside of the deck infill areas. Question No. 51: Reference Att-5 Prime and Subcontractor Construction Breakdown. Can we provide a detailed labor/material breakdown summary only, broken down by division, or will bidders be deemed non-responsive and subsequently be disqualified if they do not provide breakdowns for every single division (in addition to the summary). Answer No. 51: The proposal should be broken down into the following: DIVISION 0-SPECIAL SECTIONS DIVISION 1-GENERAL REQUIREMENTS DIVISION 2-EXISTING CONDITIONS DIVISION 3-CONCRETE DIVISION 4-MASONRY DIVISION 5-METALS DIVISION 6-WOOD AND PLASTIC DIVISION 7-THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION DIVISION 8-DOORS AND WINDOWS DIVISION 9-FINISHES DIVISION 10-SPECIALTIES DIVISION 11-EQUIPMENT DIVISION 12-FURNISHINGS DIVISION 13-SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION DIVISION 14-CONVEYING EQUIPMENT DIVISION 21-FIRE SUPPRESSION DIVISION 22-PLUMBING DIVISION 23-HEAT, VENTILATING, AND AIR CONDITIONING DIVISION 26-ELECTRICAL DIVISION 27-COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION 28-ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY DIVISION 31-EARTHWORK DIVISION 32-EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS DIVISION 33-UTILITIES DIVISION 34-TRANSPORTATION Question No. 52: Reference RFI #26 from Responses provided via Amendment 1. As noted by others, it is expected that an average of R33 insulation (with tapered insulation to provide adequate drainage) will create height issues at access points and/or rooftop equipment curbs. TPO manufacturers have minimum flashing height requirements that must be met. The VA s initial response was No , indicating that Contractor s must include in their bids all work necessary to modify existing structures and equipment to provide appropriate flashing heights. With the information provided within the project documents, this is not possible. If the government would like Contractor s to include modifications to doorways, windows, equipment curbs, or other items, additional information would be necessary. This includes, but is not limited to: How many doors/windows/equipment curbs will need to be modified for this project? Please indicate the location of each area where modifications are necessary. Please provide as-built drawings and details for the existing construction, including structural drawings for any openings needing to be modified. Will fully engineered drawings be required for such modifications? If so, do these need to be stamped by a PE? What is the existing thickness of current insulation? Note that response to RFI 24 stated to assume the roof is 12 thick. The existing roofing system [insulation/ coverboard/membrane/etc. appears to be less than 12 from the cores that were taken and shown in pictures within the Design Narrative Environmental document, reference pages 63-64. Since the designer of record or their vendors have taken core samples, please confirm what the actual depth of the existing insulation is on each roof level? Answer No. 52: Read question 26 as include door height adjustment in the bid. 9 scuppers 1/ AE101, Keynote 2.12 calls to remove the existing ballast system down to existing structure/ deck. Issue raised in RFI #26 states that it may create height issues It very well may not create height issues. Without knowing the existing roof thickness, this cannot be clearly determined. AE 101 Note 7.62, 7.63. If you ask where adjustments may be needed (referring to RFI #26), see response to 52.A above. This is contingent on knowing existing roof construction and overall thickness. Anything outside this design will have to be signed by an engineer with an appropriate signature. The need for engineered/signed and sealed drawings is contingent on the existing walls being load bearing/ structural themselves. Yes The A/E did not core to the metal base on each roof because this would require destructive investigation, which they cannot perform during site investigations. Additional comments: Looking back through the photos, you will likely NOT be able to raise the door from the Penthouse to the roof at Building 24. There appears to be a concrete beam across the header of the door. For building 1E, add a note to adjust door height as necessary. This door appears to be installed in a new(er) EIFS wall construction, and likely standard metal framing with Dryvit EIFS system façade. Thus, making it potentially much easier to raise the door. But that it with some heavy assumptions. Question No. 53: Reference New Roof Drains. Please provide interior floor plans and reflected ceiling plans for spaces in which new drain lines will need to be installed within the facility. What is the ceiling type in each of these areas? Contractors need to know if this is all ACT, or if there is drywall that will need to be removed and replaced to access the underside of the roof deck in these locations. The information provided in Detail 9/AE501 and elsewhere do not show this information. Answer No. 53: It was the first room that was completed in the walk through. There is no dry wall, just CMU (Concrete Masonry Unit) wall. The ceiling is the metal deck Question No. 54: Reference 2/E-101 & 2/E-103. Note on these details state that Buildings 1E, and 53 are protected by existing lightning protection systems on higher roof levels; please confirm that there will be no need to add lightning protection system to Roofs 1E, 53 Low A, or 53 Low B. Answer No. 54: 1E will not get lighting protection. 53 Low A and 53 Low B are not part of the project, thus will not be get lighting protection.
 

Web Link

SAM.gov Permalink
(https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/322ecfef4ad444439cf701223ff3d0e8/view)
 

Record

SN07629626-F 20251030/251028230035 (samdaily.us)
 

Source

SAM.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's SAM Daily Index Page |