Addendum 5 - Appendix T – Questions and Answers 11.16.16.pdf

RFP #3515R08 – Bridge Instrumentation and Monitoring of PA Bridges Addendum 5 – Appendix T – Q&A 11.16.16

1. Question – Section IV-5c – Engineering and Data Analysis Report (Page 36) mentions that the selected offeror shall provide a weekly report covering engineering indicators, however the List of Bridges (Appendix F) in the Engineering Reporting Frequency column, the frequency varies from bridge to bridge. Which reporting frequency will we be held to?

Answer – Section IV-5C (page 36) is revised to remove the word weekly. Refer to Appendix F for the Engineering Reporting Frequency column for each listed bridge.

2. Question – Section I-12. Economy of Preparation (Page 3) mentions the proposal shall not exceed 50 pages and it mentions that duplex printing is acceptable and suggested. Can you confirm that this reference is to 50 numbered pages or 100 numbered pages printed duplex (e.g. 50 double sided sheets)?

Answer – Section I-12 is revised to state 25 duplex pages which equals 50 numbered pages total.

3. Question – IV-1 Objectives A. General 1 (page 17) indicates that monitoring shall begin within five days upon PennDOT’s acceptance of each bridge instrumentation installation. What are the required submittals for acceptance?

Answer – All tasks listed under Task B: 2 (Page 30) are the required submittals. This will include FAT certificates, SAT certificates, and warranties being revised in Section IV-4 Task A: Instrumentation Plan.

4. Question – Section IV-4. Tasks. Task A: Instrumentation Plan and Component Installation 2.

(Page 25) We are assuming that a Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) is a vendor calibration certificate. Please confirm.

Answer –Correct.

5. Question – IV-4. Tasks. Task A: Instrumentation Plan and Component Installation 2. (Page

25) The RFP indicates that a Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) certificate, Site Acceptance Test (SAT) certificate and warranty verification voucher and are to be submitted with the Instrumentation plans. The FAT is only available after instrumentation plan is accepted and components are procured. SAT is not available until after installation. Please clarify.

Answer – Section IV-4 revised to state Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) certificate, Site Acceptance Test (SAT) certificate and warranty verification voucher and are to be submitted when instrumentation is complete. Acceptance of instrumentation will not be given until these documents are received.

6. Question - On the Elizabeth Bridge, what is meant by “Monitoring major structures for broken wires”

• Does this mean permanent monitoring, or inspection?

• Do we need to detect wires that are already broken or do we need to detect them at the moment they break?

Answer – Permanent monitoring for the duration of the contract to detect wires at the moment they break.

7. Question- Are the load tests included in the scope of the offeror?

Answer – Yes. Question is not clear; however, the Department reads this to mean the selected Offeror is responsible to load test, in that case, the answer is yes.

8. Question - Could you please explain how we need to read the pre-filled amounts in the BOQ?

Do these amounts relate to something? Are they to be respected are can they be modified?

Answer – The Department doesn’t understand the question.

9. Question - Can you confirm whether Appendix P, Q and R, are templates to be filled in for each structure before the start of the installation?

Answer –Yes, the templates in appendices P, Q, and R, shall be filled in for each structure before beginning installation.

10. Question - Section I-11. Proposal mentions that two complete and exact copies of the entire proposal (Technical and Cost submittals, along with requested documents) be proved on CD or Flash drives in Microsoft Office or Microsoft Office Compatible format. Given that our response will be developed in many different program formats including Word, Excel, Project, InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator, etc., can you confirm that submission of an Adobe PDF file is acceptable?

Answer – No, Adobe PDF file is not acceptable. The file must be in Microsoft Office Compatible format.

11. Question - In the Calendar of Events (Page iii), it indicates that the due date of the response to the proposal is Wednesday, November 10, 2016. November 10 falls on a Thursday. Can you please confirm the due date and time of the proposal response?

Answer - Please refer to Addendum 1, 2, 3, 4 on eMarketplace.

http://www.emarketplace.state.pa.us/Solicitations.aspx?SID=3515R08 http://www.emarketplace.state.pa.us/Solicitations.aspx?SID=3515R08

12. Question - Section IV-4 Tasks under Task A Deliverables (Page 29) states that the selected offeror shall not submit more than three (3) packages per week while Section IV-5 Reports and Project Controls under Section G Submittal Schedule (Page 38) under Task A indicates that no more than five (5) packages per week. Can you please confirm which is correct?

Answer – Section IV-5 Reports and Project Controls under Section G Submittal Schedule under Task A is revised to replace five (5) packages per week with three (3) packages per week.

13. Question - Section IV-4 Tasks under Task A Deliverables (Page 29) states that all twelve

(12) initial package submission must be received by PennDOT within the six (6) weeks after the kick-off meeting while Section IV-5 Reports and Project Controls under Section G Submittal Schedule (Page 38) under Task A indicates that all packages submitted within three (3) weeks from Notice to Proceed. Can you please confirm which is correct?

Answer - Section IV-5, Reports and Project Controls under Section G, Submittal Schedule under Task A is revised to replace three (3) weeks with six (6) weeks from the Notice to Proceed.

14. Question - Instrumentation Plan Protocol IP001 states: “The choice of sensor types to be used depends on the bridge being monitored. Engineering judgment, bi-ennial inspection documents, and information from Pre-Test Finite Element Modeling shall be used when selecting the appropriate sensors and locations.” We request that PennDOT make available any supporting documents, analyses etc. used in development of the conceptual instrumentation plans to aid in our selection of appropriate sensors and thresholds.

Answer – Additional files have been added to website noted in Section II-12.

15. Question - The Company would like to submit proposals in response to RFP 3515R08. As one of the leading non-destructive testing firms in the world with considerable experience regarding infrastructure monitoring throughout the US and Internationally, we know that we can provide the best solution possible to the State of Pennsylvania. However, the time to respond to this RFP is very limiting. The Company requests a 30 day extension to the submittal date. The requested submittal date would be 10 December 2016. A rapid response would be extremely appreciated.

Answer – Please refer to answer #11.

16. Question - With respect to RFP Section IV-2 [Page 18], we note that the requirement: “Upon identification of a potential defect, …”.

1. In this case, which types of defects are you asking to be monitored?

2. Must these defects – as defined in your response – be monitored at any location on the bridge in spite of the defined number of sensors?

a. For clarification, we ask this question with respect to the issue that a monitoring system can detect the occurrence of a defect, but in some cases it may be difficult to locate with precision (e.g., the occurrence of a crack in masonry can happen at any undefinable place due to the heterogeneous nature of the material).

3. Is it possible to propose additional sensors in case of detected defects?

4. Are reports or studies on possible bridge defects available for our review?

Answer - 1. The vendor’s system is to provide information based on bridge response being measured.

2. It is up to the vendor to provide the appropriate number of sensors above the minimum number indicated.

3. Yes, the cost associated with the additional sensors should be included in the cost submittal.

4. Refer to answer #14.

17. Question - With respect to Appendix F – List of Bridges Unlocked, you provide in Column K a “Minimum number of Structural Response Gauges” per bridge.

• What type of structural monitoring system is this “minimum number” of gauges based upon?

• Is this “minimum number” mandatory?

• Are Offerors permitted, based upon review of the drawings provided and capabilities of their system, to adjust the number of sensors to provide the Commonwealth with an optimal configuration that may be less than the “minimum number” of sensors provided in Appendix F, Column K?

• Is failure to provide the “minimum number” of sensors provided in Appendix F, Column K a disqualifying response?

Answer - Bullet 1- No specific system was considered in regards to the minimum number of gauges.

Bullet 2- Yes. Appendix F establishes the required minimum number of gauges for each Bridge. In accordance with Section II-12 of the RFP, the Bridge Plans and other documents are reference material only.

Bullet 3- Offeror must meet the requirements of the RFP and provide a solution that meets the minimum number of sensors required in Appendix F. However, Offerors may propose an additional solution for the Department’s consideration.

Bullet 4- Refer to bullet 3. The Department will evaluate proposals based on responsiveness to the requirements in the RFP and appendices.

18. Question - With respect to Appendix P – Protocol LT001 mentions two options for the Event Method: triggered and scheduled. Protocol LT006 only mentions long-term effects with a sampling rate of four (4) samples each hour and Protocol LT007 only mentions the Triggered Event Method.

• Does the monitoring system have to deal with both options, or is the triggered one alone sufficient?

Answer – The monitoring system must use both options.

19. Question - With respect to Appendix P – Protocol LT009 :

• Does the Rain Flow counting have to be done over a complete 24 hours record with 100 Hz sampling rate, or only over recorded events of the past 24 hours?

• In that case, do we choose the Triggered Event Method, excluding low intensity cycles which have a negligible incidence on the fatigue analysis?

Answer – Bullet 1- The Rain Flow counting must be done for recorded event of the past twenty four (24) hours.

Bullet 2- Yes, use the Triggered Event Method, excluding low intensity cycles.

20. Question - How will the Contractor be protected and/or compensated for maintenance or replacement costs resulting from acts of a third party or failure of a bridge?

Answer – Refer to Appendix B, IT Contract Terms and Conditions, Section 26 Insurance.

21. Question - Have you established a protocol per bridge in terms of sensor installation with respect to application through drilling, adhesives, etc.?

Answer – No, but any sensor installation shall be designed by a Professional Engineer.

Attachments shall not affect structural capacity or long term structural performance of the bridge.

22. Question - Are any installation processes (e.g., drilling, adhesives, etc.) preferred or forbidden on each of the bridges?

• For clarification, we ask this question as the response may influence cost.

Answer – Refer to answer #21.

23. Question - Are there installation approaches (e.g., snooper, rope, etc.) which is preferred or forbidden on each of the bridges?

• For clarification, we ask this question as the response may influence cost.

Answer – None are preferred or forbidden. However, see answer #21.

24. Question - Are there any identified risks of electromagnetic interferences on any of the twelve (12) bridges?

Answer – It is the vendor’s responsibility to assess the risk of electromagnetic interference at each bridge site.

25. Question - Must the sensors be immune to electromagnetic interference?

Answer – If there are identified risks of electromagnetic interference, per question #24, the sensors shall be immune.

26. Question - Given the DOT response to questions has been stated as Nov 10 and receipt of completed proposals shall be Nov 16, there are only 2-3 business days upon receipt of responses to adjust and deliver the completed proposal. We request 15-30 days’ timeframe from receipt of DOT responses to questions to the bid due date, so the preparers can review responses, adjust the bid accordingly, and deliver as requested.

Answer – Refer to answer #11.

27. Question -Task A.2.D – Video Detection and/or Camera (page 25 of 39) Offerors shall provide material specifications for all proposed components, software, and equipment, and any warranty information in the Technical Proposal. Components/equipment may include, but are not limited to: D. Video Detection and/or Cameras.

Please address the following items/questions:

a. Please confirm that the minimum performance required from cameras placed on each bridge listed in the RFP, and any future bridges added to the project, are sufficient for resolving the markings on a vessel beneath a bridge (12-16-inch text).

b. Please confirm that the camera is required to provide the above-referenced performance at night.

c. Please confirm that the camera is required to provide the above-referenced performance through fog and other adverse weather conditions.

d. Please verify that the camera’s field of view when installed, shall include the pier in its entirety.

Answer – a) Yes; b) Yes; c) Yes; d) Yes

28. Question - Appendix F – List of Bridges, Worksheet Table 1 The values in Column H, Condition to be Assessed and Column I, Minimum Flaw Detection Size, Trigger Notification do not correspond to one another, and, more importantly, do not correspond to the type of measurements that will be recorded on the structures. For example:

• The “2 miles north of Cooks Mills” bridge (#5300100800000) states that the Condition to Be Assessed is to “Evaluate the performance of rehabilitation/retrofit strategies such as making decks composite with prestressed box beams,” and the Minimum Flaw Detection Size, Trigger Notification is 1 mil (1 mil = 0.001 inch).

The only measurement for recording on this structure is strain, which will be recorded in units of micro-strain and typically at a resolution of around 1 micro-strain.

• The Clairton-Glassport bridge (#2203800100140) states that the Condition to Be Assessed is to “Monitor bridges with the potential for notification of barge collisions and other impacts” and the Minimum Flaw Detection Size, Trigger

Notification is 1/16” movement. Displacement, rotation and acceleration measurements will be recorded on both the superstructure and substructure.

Please address the following items/questions:

a. How does the flaw size relate to the recorded measurements defined in the preliminary instrumentation plans for each bridge?

b. Please clarify the Minimum Flaw Detection Size, Trigger Notification with respect to the condition to be assessed for each structure. Clarification on individual recorded measurements would be best.

c. Please indicate units of measurement for minimum flaw detections other than displacement (i.e., strain: microstrain, arc angle: degrees, acceleration: g, etc.).

d. In Appendix F, the agency refers to the measurement 1 mil. Please confirm that 1 mil=0.001 inch?

Answer – a) the value in the table is displacement when exceeded should trigger a notification due to barge impact; b) Appendix F has been revised; c)See b; d)Yes.

29. Question - Task A. Instrumentation Plan and Component Installation (Page 24 of 39) Preliminary instrumentation plans have been developed for all 12 bridges identified in Appendix F – List of Bridges. The measurements called out in the provided plans are limited to displacement, acceleration, rotation and strain. However, no performance specifications are given for measurements or sensors. Without performance specifications, sensors from different Offerors will vary widely in accuracy and therefore price. For example:

• Displacement measurements are called out for relative movement of the superstructure to the substructure and the relative displacement between the floorbeam and girder. The first requires a much larger range of displacement and lower accuracy (superstructure to substructure), while the other requires a sensor with a much lower range and higher accuracy (floorbeam and girder). These two types of sensors have a significant cost differential. Without a detailed performance specification, PennDOT will likely end up with a less expensive sensor that will not properly record the intended measurement.

a. Please verify that the below meets the department’s measurement requirements for the program.

i. Acceleration: range: ±2g, precision: 0.01%FS

ii. Displacement 1 (superstructure/substructure): range: 1”-10”, precision: 0.1%FS

iii. Displacement 2 (relative connection detail): range: 0.1”-1.0”, precision: 0.01%FS

iv. Strain: range: ±2000microstrain, precision: 1microstrain

v. Rotation: range: ±15 degrees, precision: 0.001 degrees

b. We respectfully request that the agency amend the RFP to reflect the above specifications in the instrumentation plans to include minimum performance requirements for each sensor.

Answer – a) It is the vendor’s responsibility to submit what measurement requirements it believes are in the best interest of the Department considering the scope of the project and the instrumentation plan is to be signed/sealed by P.E.; b) Refer to answer #11.

30. Question - Appendix R – Live Load Testing Most bridges require load testing; however, there are no specific requirements as to what the load test is to accomplish. Live Load Testing – General Protocol (Appendix R) indicates instrumentation and procedures to address a variety of live-load issues such as beam neutral axis locations, lateral load distribution, beam end-restraint, dynamic amplification factor, etc.

The preliminary instrumentation plans provided would in most cases not properly address issues defined by Appendix R. Please address the following questions:

a. Are live-load tests to be performed with the monitoring instrumentation only or is additional (temporary) instrumentation to be installed to perform a more complete load test?

b. If load tests are to be done using the sensors installed for monitoring, is the goal to simply validate the responses with a controlled load condition?

Answer - a) It is the responsibility of the P.E performing the testing to instrument the bridge appropriately; b) Test objectives: Static and Dynamic effects, and Response of bridge, determine live load deflection factors. Refer to Appendix R – Live Load Testing

– General Protocol.

31. Question - Appendix R – Live Load Testing (II) RFP Section IV-5c indicates live-load test results are to be compared with analytical results.

Please address the following questions:

a. Will analytical results come from PennDOT or the offeror?

b. Has PennDOT performed Finite Element Analysis (FEA) on these structures?

c. If so, will PennDOT provide the FEA models and previous analysis results?

d. If not, are there specific FEA requirements for these bridges?

Answer - a) The offeror must provide analytical results; b) Finite element work that has been done has been provided on the website – it may not be applicable to the work being performed in the RFP. The Department is providing finite element work that has been performed on these specific structures, but it may not be for the same exact instrumentation that we are asking for in this RFP (The Department may not have that, so the Department is providing what we have); c) Finite element work that has been done has been provided in the website; d) Refer to DM-4 for modeling requirements.

32. Question - Task A.4 Site Conditions and Design (Page 28 of 39) Conduit can vastly change the cost of the SHM systems. Please address the following questions:

a. Is conduit required for cable protection?

b. If so, is PVC acceptable?

c. If yes, do short-term installations, specifically <7-month installations, require conduit?

Answer - a) Yes, for long term monitoring; b) yes; c) no

33. Question - Specific Instrumentation Specifications, Elizabeth Bridge (#2005101100000) The preliminary instrumentation for the Elizabeth Bridge (#2005101100000) requests “Cable Gauges to determine load on cables and to signify/notify the department of wire breaks.” The plans show the “Cable Gauges” located at the anchorage points of the cables. However, no single sensor exists that can measure both the load in the cables and identify wire breaks.

Please address the following items/questions:

a. If both measurements are required, please amend the preliminary instrumentation plans to address the issue.

b. Please identify the performance specification with regards to cable load, and the level of accuracy required.

c. With regards wire break detection on the cables, does PennDOT require a sensor that simply identifies whether a wire break occurred, or does the department also want the location of the wire break? To identify the location of a wire break, multiple sensors will be required. Please specify the location of additional sensors.

d. If cable forces are to be measured, are the loads to be total in-situ loads (dead-load plus live-load), or just change in force to live-load conditions?

Answer - a) Generic cable gauge locations are indicated on the conceptual plans as minimums. It is the vendor’s responsibility to provide gauges required for the requested measurements, which include the measurement of the load on cables and wire breaks and include such gauges in the cost submittal; b) static and transient loads, dead load and live load +/- 5 kips; c) both wire break detection and location; d) both total in-situ loads and change in force to live load conditions.

34. Question - Specific Instrumentation Specifications, Clairton-Glassport bridge (#2203800100140) The preliminary instrumentation plans for the Clairton-Glassport bridge (#2203800100140) requests vertically placed resistive strain gages to be installed on the bearings (sheets 58 & 59). Sheet 63 identifies the bearings as elastomeric, captured by steel base pots and sole plates. This detail appears to leave no room to physically apply a strain gauge to the elastomeric pad, if that is PennDOT’s intention. Please address the following items/questions:

a. Please clarify the precise location of the vertical strain gauge that PennDOT is asking to be placed on the bearings.

b. Please also clarify the purpose of the measurements at this location, as a single strain gauge placed on a bearing pad will not provide the load into the bearings.

Answer - a) The appropriate placement for the instrumentation would be on the web at the bearing location to capture the vertical force change from collision; b) The gauges indicated are to measure the force transferred up into the superstructure from a pier collision.

35. Question - Monitoring System Sampling Rates There are no specifications for minimum measurement sample rates for the various structural responses. The RFP requirements imply that dynamic response measurements are required on all structures. Please address the following items/questions:

a. If left to potential Offerors, there could be a wide range of performance of the monitoring systems. For example, measurement sample rates less than 100-200Hz could fail to detect barge impacts and may produce inaccurate stress magnitudes when performing stress cycle counts (used in fatigue analysis). This is not to imply all measurements must be recorded at rates of over 100Hz, but minimum sample rate definitions are required for event triggers and binning of dynamic stress cycles, which will affect the type/performance of monitoring equipment that will be required. Please specify monitoring system requirements with respect to a minimum required sample rate for the various conditions to be assessed.

Answer – The sampling rate will be 200Hz.

36. Question - Section 3. Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Page 27 of 37 – The specifications sates that all scheduled lane closure times shall be approved by PennDOT.

a) Will the City of Pittsburgh Street Permits be required for work on the Smithfield Street Bridge?

b) If City of Pittsburgh Street Permits will be required, is the contractor responsible for the City of Pittsburgh Streets Permit Fees?

Answer – a) Yes; b) Yes

37. Question - Electrical Power and Communications Page 27 of 37 under Letter B states that there is no prescribed power source, however AC power may be available for certain bridges.

Can the electrical as-built drawings be provided for the bridges that currently have existing electrical power services for highway and navigation lighting as identified in Appendix F - AC Power Available?

Answer – The Department will provide drawings in its possession. Typically, electrical details are on the bridge plans.

38. Question - Page 24 of 37 states that Potential Offerors should note that some of the bridges identified are steel bridges and may contain Lead Paint as noted in Appendix F, List of Bridge to be Instrumented and Monitored. It shall be the Selected Offeror’s responsibility to take all precautions necessary for Worker Health and Safety and Environmental Protection when working around Lead Paint at no cost to PennDOT. Appendix F Addendum # 1 states that lead paint is “potentially” present at the following bridges: Neville Island, Elizabeth and Clairton Glassport Bridges.

a) Is the contractor responsible for sampling the paint at the bridge in question to confirm the presence of lead paint?

b) Is the contractor responsible for Worker Health Safety Plan and associated worker testing costs if lead is in fact detected based upon sample analysis?

c) Is the contractor responsible for the Environmental Plan and associated costs if lead is in fact detected based upon sample analysis?

d) How can the contractor account for the Workers Health Safety and Environmental Plan cost’s in the RFP Offering if the presence of lead is listed as “potential”?

Answer – a) Yes, but if the bridge was painted before 1988, the vendor may assume lead is present; b) Yes; c) Yes; d) The cost submittal shall include all costs necessary for Workers Health Safety and Environmental Plan.

39. Question - Section IV-4. Tasks. 4. Site Conditions and Design states The Selected Offeror shall specify the type of electric conduit (examples are: PVC, EMT or rigid).

a. Can PVC Coated stainless steel armor interlock cable assemblies be utilized in lieu of PVC, EMT or rigid conduit systems? Some of the duration of instrumentation requirements on Appendix F as relatively short term and measured in days or months.

b. Will PennDOT recognize the Published Standards for Highway Lighting Publication 72M RC80,81,82,83,84 and Bridge Construction Publication 219M BC721M or can design be proposed for conduit or hanger systems that are not detailed in the Highway Lighting or Bridge Construction Standards?

Answer – a) Yes; b) The detail must be signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer. If the detail affects performance of bridge, it shall not be approved for use.

40. Question - Section II-3 (Page 8 of 37) requests number of person hours allocated to each task. Instrumentation and monitoring projects costs are driven mainly by labor hours.

Inclusion of labor hours by task is directly correlated to cost or price. Elsewhere in the RFP it states that cost shall not be included in the technical proposal. Should labor hours by task be excluded from the technical proposal?

Answer – No.

41. Question - For multiple bridges, the conceptual instrumentation plans indicate a different number of measurements than listed in Appendix F "minimum number of structural response gauges". Please clarify exactly how many measurements are required at each bridge.

Answer – Refer to question and answer #17.

42. Question - Where acceleration measurements are indicated, direction is not specified, please clarify whether these are intended to be single or multi-directional measurements.

Answer – Multi-directional x, y, z.

43. Question - For the Neville Island Bridge gauges D08-XL-F01-TF-LT, D10-XL-F01-TF-RT, D12-XL-F14-TF-LT, and D14-XL-F14-TF-RT the naming convention indicates these to be "TF" top flange locations, but are shown on the bottom flange in the drawing. Please confirm gauge location & label.

Answer – The location shown is correct. Label should be BF instead of TF. Labels have been corrected, and the revised instrumentation plan placed on the website noted in Section II-12.

44. Question - For the Neville Island bridge, please confirm that the purpose of cable gauges is to measure cable force, and whether the intent is measure permanent or transient forces.

Answer – Yes the purpose of the cable gauges is to measure cable force, and both permanent and transient forces should be measured.

45. Question - The Shippingport Bridge instrumentation plans refer to a rating analysis used to identify additional instrumentation locations, is this rating analysis in the scope of this RFP or something that will be provided by PennDOT?

Answer – Refer to answer #14.

46. Question - Instrumentation labels on Crook Mills Bridge appear to have inconsistent labels between sheets 4 & 5, please clarify.

Answer – The labels have been corrected and the revised instrumentation plan placed on the website noted in Section II-12.

47. Question - The instrumentation plan for I-83 South indicates locations of girders and floorbeams that require investigation and states that "instrumentation within each group may vary depending on the data required from each location". If an inspection is not part of this scope, are offerors expected to use existing inspection reports to determine additional instrumentation needs?

Answer – Refer to answer #14.

48. Question - Bridge plans provided for the Sanatoga Bridge are for a "Rigid Frame Bridge" but instrumentation and inspection plans show a masonry arch, please confirm whether the provided drawing is correct.

Answer – The S-1070 is not correct and has been removed from the website noted in Section II-12.

49. Question - For bridges that require load testing, please provide a test objective in order for offerors to appropriately plan the load testing.

Answer – Refer to answer #30b.