12505B23Q0012 - Questions and Answers dated 12.8.22.pdf

12505B23Q0012 – Bldg 154 DA Feedwater, Condensate (Controls), Ames, IA

Questions and Answers dated 12/8/22

1) I was looking over Statement of Work paper work for DA, Feedwater, and Condensate tank controls. Under Project Requirements 1.0 section B.

Scope. It says one Allen Bradley panel view standard touch screen. Is there an exact part number or screen size that is required.

USDA Reply- The new panel view should be an Allen Bradley 10” panel view standard 7 touch screen (or approved equal).

Can the team provide the current boiler chemical pump manufacturer and output (gal/day) of the pumps?

USDA Reply- No, chemical pump information is not relevant to the project.

The SOW states the following:

2) "On Page 2, Training shall be included and consist of at least 2 separate, 2 hour training sessions.

Each session should take place on different days and cover operation and maintenance of all components." Will this training take place on consecutive days or will separate trips be required to conduct training?

USDA Reply- Training can take place on two consecutive days.

3) On Page 1 the SOW states, "The contractor shall replicate and update all existing points in the Johnson Controls Building Automation System (JCI)," Is the model number of the Johnson Controls Building Automation System available?

USDA Reply- The existing JCI controller will remain in service and communications to the JCI/BAS will be BACnet over IP. The JCI system is currently at Rev 12.

4) The document, "Drawings_Condensate_DA+Control+Cabinet+Drawings+Dated+July+27+2006.pdf", shows on page 25 that the PLC system consist of a Condensate Controller, item PLC4 (a controllogix unit), a Deaerator Controller, and a Min Flow Controller. These controls consist of 4 separate PLC's. In the SOW, page 2, there are several PLC components listed to be supplied. These components only consist of 1 PLC. Is it the government's intention to consolidate the three PLC non Controllogix controllers into 1 PLC?

USDA Reply- Yes.

5) The document, "Drawings_Condensate_DA+Control+Cabinet+Drawings+Dated+July+27+2006.pdf", shows on page 26 that there are 3 separate Panelviews. The SOW request 1 Panelview. Is it the government's intention to consolidate all 3 Panelview into 1 Panelview?

USDA Reply- Yes.

Should the new Panelview be the same size as the existing Panelview or should a larger one be supplied (I would recommend a larger one - The existing ones are 600 series and I would recommend a 1000 series)?

USDA Reply- The new panel view should be an Allen Bradley 10” panel view standard 7 touch screen (or approved equal).

6) Does the government desire that all work is performed in the existing control enclosure and no new enclosures are supplied?

USDA Reply- Correct.

7) Existing PLC/HMI programs

a. The RFP instructs the contractor to download the existing programs. Downloading of an older PLC does not include tag names or rung references. These were held in the offline programs. It appears that at-best, two of the development programs exist. Without these, the software downloaded would have to be reverse engineered. Do these exist and will they be made available to the contractor or do we include reverse-engineering them?

USDA Reply- Drawings have been posted to SAM.gov and may contain useful information. The USDA has some older programs that might contain useful information, these will be available for reference.

b. Do drawings that show the Input/Output of the PLC exist and are they available to the contractor?

USDA Reply- Drawings have been posted to SAM.gov

c. Does an Operations and Maintenance manual exist for each system and will they be available to the contractor?

USDA Reply- Yes.

d. The addresses and tagnames in the existing PLC do not follow the new standards used in the specified new PLC. Migrating the logic from the old PLCs to the new PLC can be done one of two ways. 1.) The old logic and old standards can be closely imported directly into the new PLC or 2.) the logic with new tagnames appropriate for the new PLC can be created to mirror the functions but use current methodology. The former is easier but harder to visualize and troubleshoot later while the latter is the native method of the specified PL and the current standard. It is also easier to troubleshoot, but will take time to convert. Which method should be utilized? I recommend converting them.

USDA Reply- The contractor shall download and replicate the existing programs for DA, Feedwater and Condensate control. Drawings have been posted to SAM.gov and may contain useful information. The USDA has some older programs that might contain useful information, these will be available for reference.

e. Is the fourth PLC, the ControlLogix, to be replaced also?

i. If yes, the hardware list is incomplete in that he Devicenet interface is missing.

USDA Reply- Refer to the SOW and drawings.

8) Johnson Controls

a. Is the contractor expected to make the changes to the facilities JCI, or are they to supply to the facility JCI manager the changes needed in the JCI to accommodate the updated control PLCs?

USDA Reply- The contractor (or sub-contractor) will need to make the changes to the facilities

JCI/BAS.

b. If the contractor is to make the changes, what software and version is being used at the facility?

USDA Reply- The JCI system is currently at Rev 12.

c. If we have to make the changes, will the facilities Johnson Controls development software be available to the contractor?

USDA Reply- Software will be available.

9) “All work performed will need to be documented IAW EPA standards/regulations.” Is there something missing in this sentence? Is it asking for the contractor to provide some form of documentation of the work or to perform work per documented standards and procedures?

USDA Reply- Yes, documentation is required.

10) The Statement of Work calls out redline drawings but does not call out creating any CAD based drawings. This predicates that drawings currently exist. Do all required drawings showing all current PLC related connections currently exist? Are they available in AutoCAD dxf format or equivalent?

USDA Reply- Drawings have been posted to SAM.gov

11) Devicenet

a. The system interfaces to a Devicenet network. What other devices in that network communicate with the PLCs to be replaced?

USDA Reply- No other devices.

12) SOW does not mention FTView ME License. FTView ME is a required license for panel view. Will this license be provided by Gov for this contract.

USDA Reply- No

13) SOW does not mention RSLogix5000 software/licensing. RSLogix5000 is required for configuration/programming of the PLC controller. Contractor will assume that the Gov does not require a RSLogix5000 license under this effort.

USDA Reply- All software/licensing will be the contractor’s responsibility and turned over to the USDA.

14) If programming the new points into the existing JCI HMI is required under this work. Please provide the current software version of the installed HMI and current programmer/sub-contractor for this effort.

USDA Reply- The JCI system is currently at Rev 12. The JCI (Johnson Controls) system is a building automation system, so the points will need to be integrated into the campus system and not an HMI.

15) SOW requires the purchase of 1 PanelView, however 3 PanelView are existing. Is it the governments intent to consolidate the PanelView HMI to include the control of all three of the previous PanelView’s?

USDA Reply- Yes, the new panel view should be an Allen Bradley 10” panel view standard 7 touch screen (or approved equal).

16) UL Certification is not possible with field modifications of panelboards, without a UL certified field engineer. Is this field certification of the existing control cabinet intended under this SOW?

USDA Reply- No

17) New PanelView size is not specified, Does the government want to match existing, or, since UL is not possible, upgrade the size of the PanelView display?

USDA Reply- The new panel view should be an Allen Bradley 10” panel view standard 7 touch screen (or approved equal).

18) Does the 5 day on-site limitation include JCI programming, new control system commissioning and acceptance?

USDA Reply- Yes.

19) Will the holes, where the two legacy PanelView’s were located, need to be patched under this effort, and if so, please specify the desired end state for these patches

USDA Reply- Yes, a new cover plate will need to be installed.

20) Please confirm Government will provide applicable security policies, procedures, directives, and orders referenced under this SOW?

USDA Reply- Yes.

21) Will Government of Contract be responsible for operating the system in HAND during the upgrade ?

USDA Reply- Hand operation during the project will need to be coordinated with the COR and be of an absolute minimum.

22) Existing sensors, valves, pumps and other controlled equipment verification and testing is not required under this effort.

USDA Reply- Correct.

END