Attachment 40 - Technical Questions and Answers Volume 4.pdf

Hines VA EHRM Infrastructure Design Solicitation Responses Volume 03 www.specializedeng.com

Date: 08/17/2023

Project Name: VA Hines EHRM Infrastructure Design Project #: 21081.001

Re: Solicitation Responses

Specialized Engineering Solutions is submitting a solicitation response for the EHRM Infrastructure Design Project at the Hines VA in Chicago, IL. Refer to the following information:

1. Who is the current Controls Integrator contact for the VA Hines Campus?

Response:

Rob Hester Vice President Sales Mobile: (479) 739-5317 Office: (479) 474-7222 Fax: (479) 474-8839 Email: rob.hester@tlservices.com Website: www.tlservices.com

2. Please confirm the ceiling types for bidding purposes in rooms with data devices. This will have a significant impact in pricing based on potential patching and access panels in these rooms if they are hard lid versus ACT.

Response: New ceilings have been identified within the construction documents. Existing conditions have not been fully identified within the contract documents and will not be able to be fully communicated by the bid. For competitive bidding purposes, the contractor shall bid ACT ceilings vs gyp ceilings as being a 40% Gyp/60% ACT split for the project.

3. Follow Up to Solicitation Question Volume 1, Question 48: Are we to assume that areas with existing data devices will not require new wall sleeves? If new sleeves are required, please provide a count.

Response: Contractor to provide and install new sleeves as required. Assume every corridor wall/door assembly and building separation will have walls to deck and will require a listed fire sleeve assembly. Data device rough-ins shall extend to corridors.

A. Follow Up Question: Please confirm the number and size of sleeves required per room for bidding purposes.

Response: Exact quantity of sleeves cannot be determined by design team as installer may vary exact route.

It is recommended that each data rough-in be stubbed to nearest corridor if the installer does not want to estimate sleeves for their routes. This eliminates the need for sleeves outside of main corridor routes.

Installer can then identify route within main corridor to serving TR. Assume every corridor wall/door assembly and building separate will have walls to deck. Each location shall be provided with a UL listed sleeve assembly sized per requirements within construction documents.

Hines VA EHRM Infrastructure Design Solicitation Responses Volume 03

4. Follow Up to Solicitation Question Volume 1, Question 66: Suggested matrix of responsibility on sheet T1000 states “CONDUIT SLEEVES (NOT SHOWN BUT REQUIRED FOR PROPER INSTALLATION OF SYSTEM)” Please confirm these locations or give a quantity to use as this request is conflicting with other information in the technology sheets for a scope of work. Given this is a fully designed project we would expect this to be shown on the drawings and not covered by a catch all phrase when it has not been included in the bidding documents by the designer.

Response: Contractor to provide and install new sleeves as required. Assume every corridor wall/door assembly and building separation will have walls to deck and will require a listed fire sleeve assembly. Data device rough-ins shall extend to corridors.

A. Follow Up Question: Please confirm the rough in required to the corridors, is this conduit extending from the rooms into the corridors or just vertical conduit running up from the outlet? If running conduit into the sleeve please provide a detail showing this connection.

Response: Communications cabling shall be in conduit where passing through a wall. Extending rough-ins for each data device to the corridor or just stubbing the rough-in to above ceiling and utilizing sleeves are both acceptable. The installer has the ability to utilize the means and methods they prefer. Rough-ins extending to corridors is not a project requirement but an acceptable solution. The goal of the design was to not dictate the means and methods so tightly that the installer did not have flexibility when working with existing conditions. The existing conditions are going to require a great amount of flexibility.

5. Follow Up to Solicitation Question Volume 1, Question 49: Are we to assume that areas with existing data devices will not require new conduit? If new conduit is required, please provide a count.

Response:

▪ Design team is unable to determine existing conduit sizes at every outlet location as conduits could not be viewed without destruction of the building. Contractor should assume for bidding purposes that existing communications rough-ins have ½” conduit which can accommodate 2 cables. Locations with more than 2 cables will likely require an additional outlet location.

▪ SCOPE OF WORK INCLUDES RE-USE OF EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS OUTLET ROUGH-IN FOR NEW CATEGORY 6A CABLING. NEW CATEGORY 6A CABLING AT EXISTING OUTLET LOCATIONS SHALL BE AS

FOLLOWS BASED ON 0.230” O.D. REDUCED DIAMETER CAT 6A CABLE:

i. EXISTING ½” CONDUIT ROUGH-IN LOCATIONS TO RECEIVE A MAXIMUM OF TWO (2) CAT 6A

CABLES.

ii. EXISTING ¾” CONDUIT ROUGH-IN LOCATIONS TO RECEIVE A MAXIMUM OF FOUR (4) CAT 6A

CABLES.

iii. EXISTING 1” CONDUIT ROUGH-IN LOCATIONS TO RECEIVE A MAXIMUM OF SEVEN (7) CAT 6A

CABLES.

iv. PROVIDE NEW CONDUIT AND BACKBOX AT LOCATIONS EXCEEDING THE REQUIREMENTS LISTED ABOVE. NEW CONDUIT SIZE SHALL BE BASED ON 40% FILL, TALING INTO CONSIDERATION THE

DERATING OF THE CONDUIT CAPACITY FOR EACH 90 DEGREE BEND.

v. FOR BIDDING PURPOSES AT ALL LOCATIONS WITH (3) OR MORE CABLES AS INDICATED ON THE

PLAN THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME ½” EXISTING CONDUIT AND WILL BE REQUIRED TO

PROVIDE NEW ¾ “ OR LARGER RACEWAY.

A. Follow Up Question: Please confirm new conduit will be in wall and not surface mounted. In wall will have a significant cost impact with patching/painting.

Response: The bidder shall assume new rough-ins will be concealed in walls with patch and paint necessary.

Once field conditions are better known, value management opportunities can be discussed with successful bidder.

Hines VA EHRM Infrastructure Design Solicitation Responses Volume 03

6. Follow Up to Solicitation Question Volume 1, Question 50: Are we to assume that areas with existing data devices will not require new boxes? If new boxes are required, please provide a count.

Response: Refer to Technology Installation Note 14 on sheet TI000.

A. Follow Up Question: Existing box sizes are not shown in the documents. Please clarify how to proceed with figuring new boxes based on sizes that are not shown.

Response: Field reviewing every backbox during the design was not possible. For bidding purposes, assume 25% of backboxes on site will require an extension. Provide time and material proposal with bid for additional backboxes identified beyond 35%.

7. Is it possible to get a typical detail for rooms with data devices showing all of the above requested information?

Response: Because of the variation possibilities of the existing conditions on site, a typical cover all application detail was confusing for the project. Verbiage, as further described above, provides better clarity than a typical detail might. The bidder shall do their best to provide a price to account for the project descriptions identified.

Many exact project elements are buried in walls and ceilings that could not be access without demolition and the requirements provided with the project provide the best opportunity to account for the installation situations that will be required for the project.