Addendum 2.docx
DOCX document 17 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- RFP IHHA 2026000244 3
- Issued by
- Pueblo County, Colorado
About this file
This Addendum 2 document provides clarifications and answers to bidder questions regarding the Southern District Water Treatment Chemicals RFP 2026000244 in Colorado. The procurement involves water treatment chemical services for multiple facilities across four locations: San Carlos Building 56, La Vista Buildings 105 and 111, and CMHIP Building 118. The service requirements include monthly visits on a rotating schedule (Week 1: Heat Plant and CMHIP; Week 2: Heat Plant and La Vista; Week 3: Heat Plant and San Carlos; Week 4: Heat Plant and CMHIP repeating). Building 56 requires one ST70 tank and one TRASAR tank with secondary containment; Buildings 105 and 111 each require one ST70 tank and one TRASAR tank with secondary containment; and Building 118 requires two ST70 tanks and two TRASAR tanks with secondary containment, all with secondary containment. Building 118's controllers are currently leased from the chemical vendor, with four controllers leased total (two in use and two held for anticipated future expansion).
The addendum confirms that all stainless steel containers must remain stainless steel per site standards to ensure stability and structural assurance, with the exception of one poly tank at the chiller plant, which may be replaced with a poly tank. This decision prioritizes durability and regulatory compliance over cost savings, as stainless steel containers provide additional assurance regarding tank stability despite higher costs compared to industry-standard double-wall polyethylene containers approved by the EPA. The procurement is managed by the state of Colorado under RFP 2026000244, published June 9, 2026.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Final Water Treatment Chemicals SDFM RFP .docx | DOCX document | |
| Exhibit B 2025.docx | DOCX document | |
| Exhibit D Contract Template, Terms & Conditions v 4.13 Final Locked.docx.pdf | ||
| Walkthrough.pdf | ||
| Addendum 1 (1) (2).docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Addendum 2 Questions and Answers Southern District Water Treatment Chemicals Published 6/9/2026
RFP 2026000244
1. According to the table below, it looks like there are two other buildings with open water cooling systems. This would indicate that you need a total of four controllers and a total of eight container containers for cooling tower chemicals collectively. Can you confirm that the following schedule is correct?
Bldg 56 - one controller, two containers, monthly visit
Bldg 105, 111 - one controller, two containers, monthly visit
Bldg 118 - two controllers, four containers, monthly visit
The following chemical schedule is correct. Please note that DOC owns its own controllers and pumps.
· San Carlos - Building 56: One St70 tank with secondary containment and one TRASAR tank with secondary containment
· La Vista - Building 105: One ST70 tank with secondary containment and one TRASAR tank with secondary containment.
· La Vista - Building 111: One ST70 tank with secondary containment and one TRASAR tank with secondary containment.
· CMHIP - Building 118: Controllers are not owned and are currently leased from our chemical vendor. At present, four controllers are being leased, with two currently in use. I requested leasing three additional controllers in anticipation of a potential future chiller tower. Building 118 currently has two ST70 tanks with secondary containment and two TRASAR tanks with secondary containment.
Monthly service visits follow a rotating schedule:
· Week 1: Heat Plant and CMHIP
· Week 2: Heat Plant and La Vista
· Week 3: Heat Plant and San Carlos
· Week 4: Heat Plant and CMHIP etc.
2. Is there a specific regulation requiring the use of stainless steel containers? Industry standard containers are double-wall polyethylene, which is approved by the EPA.
Stainless containers are significantly more expensive than poly. This would be an area of savings for the state.
The current provider is using a poly tank at the chiller plant we surveyed.
All Stainless steel containers should be replaced with stainless steel, this is our site standard and also provides extra assurance regarding stability.
The one poly tank can be replaced with a poly tank.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .