140R3026R0004_-_Questions_from_Site_Visit_0004.pdf

140R3025R0004 Brock Gates Replacement Question # Offeror Questions Reclamation Response

Page 75 of Solicitation says to provide Specilaized Experience Forms for each subcontractor for Factor 3. We did not see the Specialized Experience Form. Can you please provide

Attachment 8 Key Subcontractor Specialized Experience Form is provided via this amendment (Amendment 0003).

Per our interpretationof FAR 14.407-2(c)(2(, a make-or-buy program is not required for this project as it falls below the $20M estimated value threshold and is not a research or development project, has no required prototypes or hardware, and does not require follow-on production for which make-or-buy program would be required.

Please confirm that no make-or-buy programe is required in response to this solicitation.

No FAR Clause is included in the solicitation related to make-or-buy

3 Will BUREC accept completed PPQs from the USACE/US Navy for Factor 2-Past Performance? The PPQ will be accepted however; the CPARS will also be reviewed, per section L.

4 Is a PPQ form required if a CPARS is available for the projects submitted under Factor 2-Past Performance?

For contracts listed as references that do not have an existing CPARS record, a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) must be submitted. For references with CPARS records, the Past Performance information will be obtained directly from the system.

Referring to Section 31 03 10 -Control of Water, Part 1, Paragraph 1.01.A.1.a, "Includes replacing stop log seals", we noted that the contract drawings do not indicate the specif locations or quantity of stop log seals to be replaced. Based on the informational Drawing 423-D-789, List of Parts Table, we can determine the total number of stop logs if it is assumed that all stop logs are to receive new seals. However, the list of parts table referenced drawings 423-D-790 and 423-D-791 for seal details, and those are not included in the provided plant set. As a result, the seal tupe and material specifictions cannot be verified. Please clarify: a:

Which stop log seals are required to be replaced? b. Please provide the Information only drawings 423-D-790 and 423-D-791 or otherwise confirm the required seal specficiations to be used for this project.

The line "Includes replacing stop log seals" located in Section 31 03 10 -Control of Water, Part 1, Paragraph 1.01.A.1.a; should be deleted. The seals on the stop logs that will be used in the forbay/afterbay gates will be replaced prior to outages required for this project.

TSC: specification Section 31 03 10 has been ammended to remove paragraph 1.01.A.1.a.

The Variable Resistors to be installed in the junction boxes do not call out a specific type or size that may differ from impressed current to galvanic systems. There is also no detail on how the hardware is mounted inside the junction boxes. Depending on the size of the resistors needed, there may not be enough room to install them in the provided junction box sizes. Please specify the variable resistor type and size.

Sizes and need shall be verified based on system testing ICCP systems - variable resistor type can be Rheostat or slide, 50 Watt - 5 Ohm GACP system of outlet pipe stoplogs - variable resistor type can be Rheostat or slide, 25 Watt - 1 Ohm

The Solicitation document page 72 of 85 states that the contractor is to assume a notice to proceed (NTP) date on August 3, 2026. This NTP date would not allow enough time to fabricate the gates and have them onsite for the shutdown. Will the BUREC allow the contractor to begin submittals and procurement of the gates and other components as soon as possible after awarding the contract? When is the anticipated award date?

Page L-12 Factor 1 Technical Plan for Construction section 2) will be deleted. See revised page L-12. Anticipated award date of April 1st should be assumed with NTP to be provided after bonding and insurance is approved. The awardee can commence gate design work after NTP is received. Gates are to be designed by gate manufacturer per specifcations and AWWA C561 standards. Manufacturer drawings are then to be submitted to BOR for review and approval prior to manufacturing.

Will the BUREC consider extending the bid date by 1-week in order to give all vendors additional time to prepare quotes and adjust based on the Q&A responses that are yet to be published?

Time extension for the proposal submittals: 11am AZ time on February 23, 2026.

Wanted to confirm the detailed shop drawings for the fabrication of the requested gates in the RFQ. Our estimator and I have gone over the attachments on the SAM.gov solicitation and did not find the specific drawings for the gates. There are multiple drawings for the canals, electrical, and lift stations but not as-built of the gates themselves.

Gates are to be designed by gate manufacturer per specifcations and AWWA C561 standards. Manufacturer drawings are then to be submitted to BOR for review and approval prior to manufacturing.

CLIN A-6 for coatings pertains to all coating. If the optional gate work is not chosen, should an additional CLIN be added for the coating work to separate it from the base and optional locations? Would the government still like the coating work performed at Cell 1?

Coating work should still be performed at Cell 1 and shall be included in CLIN A-6.

CLIN A-9 for cathodic pertains to all cathodic. If the optional gate work is not chosen, should an additional CLIN be added for the cathodic work to separate it from the base and optional locations? Would the government still like the cathodic work performed at Cell 1

If the optional gate work for Cell 1 is not awarded, the CP cable attachment to the gate and new conduit will not be installed (annodes, cable boxes, junction boxes will be installed). See marked-up drawing 423-D-60247. Existing gate will be connected into new CP system using existing cable and conduit.

12 What height should a contractor assume for the cofferdam? Please refer to reference drawing 423-D-660 for canal prism dimension.

13 Is the cofferdam being utilized to stop water from getting to the work location or is the cofferdam's purpose to hold the water in the canal? Cofferdam is to retain nuisance water that could pond up over duration of project.

14 What is the assumed amount of leakage of the bulkhead or stoplogs that gets put onto the cofferdam?

Leakage rate is unknown, but based on previous activity gates and stop logs leak;

therefore, the cofferdam shall be installed to stop the gate leakage from reaching the work area.

The technical proposal says to have a Notice to Proceed of August 3, 2026. With gate and operators taking considerable time, can we assume that Notice to Proceed is only for construction activites and not submittals or fabrication?

Correct, see response for question 7

16 Please verify that the contractor will have 547 days from Notice to proceed of August 3, 2026 and the contract will be till February 1, 2028.

547 days begins on the Notice to Proceed date. Refer to revised SF1442 and response to question 7.

Is the government anticipating work to occur in 2027-2028 due to the 547 days from Notice to Proceed of August 3, 2026, rather than in 2026-2027 as described in other areas of the solicitation.

No work is anticipated in 2028, see response to question 16

18 Please verify that the government wants a secondary attachment for Factor 1 of the .xer format of the schedule emailed with our bid.

Correct, refer to technical evaluation factor 1 under "Coordinated Construction Schedule" in section L.12 of RFP.

Drawings 423-D-60240 and 423-D-40241 require the contractor to verify the thimble and dimensions for the new gate installation. Will a shutdown occur immediately after the award to verify this information for the gate manufacturer?

An outage is only possible until the scheduled full outage. Field verification concerns the installation of the gate frame to the existing thimble. Speficiation Section 35 23 11, paragraph 2.01 A.5.c.2 states:

"Gate frame shall be supplied undrilled to allow for field verification of existing thimble hole locations and to perform non-destructive testing to locate embedded reinforcement prior to drilling anchors into existing concrete"

Speficiation Section 35 23 11, paragraph 3.01 B provides installation requirements.

Additionally, Rodney Hunt drawings E70542, E70543, E70545, E70553 and E70559 are provided as reference. These drawings are not guaranteed to be as-built condition, but should offer better guidance and understanding of the currently installed gates.

Can we get a copy of the original gate and thimble drawings?

Yes, Rodney Hunt shop drawings E70542, E70543, E70545, E70553 and E70559 are provided as an attachment in the Amendment for information only per Section 52 00 00, Drawings, paragraph 1.03.

The RFP requires submission of the project schedule developed using Primavera P6 Pro version 6.2 or newer in .xer format. Please confirm whether, in addition to the .xer file, a PDF version of the project schedule and schedule narrative is also required to be included in Volume - Technical Proposal

Correct, refer to technical evaluation factor 1 under "Coordinated Construction Schedule" in section L.12 of RFP.

Amended RFP Section L (p. L-15) references the requirement for Specialized Experience Forms for subcontractors and identifies this as Attachment 8 per Section J- 1; however, Attachment 8 appears to be a Subcontracting Plan template. Please confirm whether a separate Specialized Experience Form is required and, if so, provide the correct form or attachment reference.

See response to Question 1.

23 It was mentioned in the Site Visit but Section L notes an assumed NTP date of Aug 3rd, 2026. Can you please clarify?

See response to Question 7.

Are the seals meant to be replaced on the stop logs? Section 31 03 10.1.01.A notes the replacement of the seals. What onsite effort will be required for ensuring the stoplogs seal if the seals aren’t to be replaced? While onsite, it appeared that the stop logs seals may have been in tough shape.

See response to Question 5

Depending on the NTP date, allowing time for RSN’s, and lead time for fabrication, there is concern about obtaining the gates by first week of October as required on Page 4 of the Statement of Work. If the gates won’t be delivered until after the first week of October, will the project have to wait until an outage begins in November 2027?

See response to Question 7. As stated in the Scope of Work the five gates must be onsite by no later than the first week of October 2026.

26 To confirm on Schedule B- CLIN A-13 is for 2ea gates and CLIN a-14 is for 6ea gates?

That is correct

27 Is temporary power available for the contractor onsite? No, reference specification 01 51 00 Temporary Utilities Section 1.03

28 Will PIV cards be required or are Site Security RSN’s acceptable due to the work being mostly outside?

No PIV cards will be required. Refer to specification Work Restrictions 01 14 00

The Quality Procedures specification (01 46 00.1.04.B.3) requires a full time onsite Quality Control Supervisor with no other duties. Would it be acceptable for the Project Superintendent (with experience as specified) to act as the QCS?

Reclamation is concerned about the quality of the project; therefore, the QCS shall have no other duties and report to the Company VP or higher. See amended Section 01 46 00.

30 It was mentioned at the job walk the Bureau wanted to change pole lights not shown on the plans, we have pics but not quantity. How many light pole replacements should we include?

No light poles are being replaced, only the (five) old incandescent lighting fixtures (shown in dwg 423-D-60256) are being replaced with LED fixtures.

In the 099620 spec, 1.03 ‘submittal’s, E. – Qualifications, #3… “3. Coating Contractor Inspector(s):

a. Provide one of the following to document qualifications to inspect specified coating materials:

1) Current certification for NACE Certified Coatings Inspector (CIP) Level 3 or AMPP Senior Certified Coating Inspector.

2) Letter from contractor listing the inspection personnel and current certifications for each.

a) Inspector: certified at a minimum as NACE CIP Level 1 or AMPP Basic Coatings Inspector.

b) Supervisor: review and certify inspection results as NACE CIP Level 3 or AMPP Senior Certified Coatings Inspector.” For the AMPP certified inspector, can they be in-house or must be third party? And it reads the supervisor must be AMPP certified as well. So the BOR’s intention is to have two individuals on-site at all times with these certifications?

The coatings inspector(s) may be either in-house or third party.

Option 1 (Single Inspector): The inspector must be a CIP Level 3/AMPP Senior Certified Coatings Inspector. Only one inspector is required.

Option 2 (Multiple Inspectors): The inspector is either a CIP Level 1/Basic Coatings Inspector or a CIP Level 2/AMPP Certified Coatings Inspector. CIP Level 1 and CIP Level 2 inspectors must be supervised, directly or indirectly, by a CIP Level 3/ AMPP Senior Certified Coatings Inspector (referred to as "Supervisor").

32 Is it possible to extend the proposal due date by 1 week? See response to Question 8

General Gate Design Information (the basis for suggested changes to the contract documents)

• General structural thresholds where a design change needs to be considered is determined by the formula determining the “Gate Factor”. The Gate Factor is determined by multiplying the width of the gate opening X the head (in feet) from the invert of the opening to provide a number in sq. ft.

this is done with a wraparound gusset at each of the anchoring location on the vertical side. Details C&D on attached 423-D-60241 does not show this and the specification does not call for this. See details & sample drawings provided (attached). This is true for all designs in the market today.

an unsupported zone between the reinforcement member on the slide and the frame itself. This zone receives all of the forces from the slide and needs to be capable of carrying those loads into the guide frame groove in compliance with AWWA C561.

Each manufacturer may vary on how wide that zone is but they all need to take that into consideration.

Same reasons as stated above.

issue on the Brock Reservoir project.

Specifications section 35 23 11 requires that gates be designed in accordance with AWWA C561 to a design head of 20-ft, in addition to USBR specific requirements.

In accordance with AWWA C561, section 4.4.2: "the slide shall be designed for the design head indicated with a minimum safety factor of 4 with regard to ultimate tensile, compressive, and shear strength, or a minimum safety factor of 2 with regard to yield strength of the material used (whichever is less)." "Slide deflection shall not exceed 1/720 of gate width at maximum design head".

In accordance with AWWA C561, section 4.4.1: "the frame shall be designed for the design head indicated with a minimum safety factor of 4 with regard to ultimate tensile, compressive, and shear strength, or a minimum safety factor of 2 with regard to yield strength of the material used (whichever is less)."

USBR does not require a specific method (as described in the bidder comments) of achieving these strength and deflection requirements. Submitted gate drawings and data under RSN 35 23 11 -1 and -2 must show compliance with AWWA C561 and specifications.

Gate speed

2.07 Motor Operated Gate actuator

A. 9 -Operating Speed : 12 inches per minute.

Is this correct since one of the issues in the past has been the speed of the gates being too fast for flow control. Would you accept a gate speed of 8 inches per minute? The motors will be Class “H” instead of Class “F” to allow for higher temperatures and longer run times.

Specification Section 35 23 11, paragraphs 2.07 A.9 and A.20 will be ammended prior to award. See changes in form SF30.

Vendor Questions