Attachment 8 - Q and A Responses.docx

1. After the site visit, it looks like significant trenching to the electrical building is involved. Do you have a site plan with underground utilities marked?

New trenching between the electrical building and insectary is outside the scope of this project. The existing insectary drawing, E-601, identifies an existing 3-inch conduit for new conductors. Please have the electrical contractor assess whether that conduit and the existing electrical path can serve the proposed upgrade. If they cannot, please identify the specific issue for Government review rather than including a new trench in the bid.

1. Looks like the NF/NQ panels and the 460v to 208v transformer will take time to get and to ship to the island. This would put it slightly past the 90 day timeframe. Would 120 days be acceptable?

We can support revising the performance period to 120 days to account for equipment procurement and shipment to Hawaii, subject to the CO's approval.

1. Existing equipment “4SB1”: Please confirm whether this equipment is rated at 400 amps. If not, please provide its existing rating and clarify whether the contractor must furnish and install replacement equipment rated at 400 amps.

The insectary drawing identifies 4SB1 as a 400 A panel. Replacement of 4SB1 is not currently intended solely to achieve a 400 A rating; any required panel or breaker changes should be identified in the final electrical design.

1. Existing transformer(s) “TSB”: Please confirm whether the existing transformer(s) are rated at 75 kVA each. If not, please provide the existing rating(s) and clarify whether the contractor must furnish and install new 75 kVA transformer(s).

The insectary drawing identifies one 75 kVA transformer labeled TSB. A recent electrician's inspection also describes the existing transformer as 75 kVA. Its installed nameplate should be verified before ordering equipment.

1. Transformer replacement: Regardless of the existing rating(s), does the scope require replacement of the existing transformer(s), or are they to remain in service and be reused?

The proposed laboratory container requires approximately 130 amps of additional capacity. Based on the existing system load, adding this demand to the current 75 kVA transformer would bring the transformer too close to its practical operating limit. Therefore, installation of the new laboratory container using the existing transformer is not possible without an upgrade. The intended work is to replace the existing 75 kVA transformer with a 125 kVA transformer. This upgrade would increase the secondary capacity to approximately 350 amps. Operating the transformer at 80% of its rated capacity would provide approximately 280 amps of usable capacity, allowing sufficient capacity for the existing electrical load and the additional 130 amps required for the new laboratory container. Based on this, the existing 150-amp primary feeder should not require an upgrade, subject to final verification of the transformer configuration, feeder ratings, available fault current, and applicable electrical-code requirements.