Addendum 5 to RFP 00002391.pdf

Procurement Services City Operations City of Portland, Oregon

@PortlandGov portlandgov

PortlandORGov

April 25, 2025

ADDENDUM NO. 5

RFP No. 00002391

FOR

Advanced Metering Infrastructure Supply, Installation, and Maintenance Services - Hardware and Software for Water Utilities

Proposals Due: May 12, 2025 By: 4:00 pm

This Addendum provides answers to questions received for the above-entitled project to be considered by each respondent. Any changes made by this Addendum to said specifications offset only the portion of the words or paragraphs specifically mentioned herein, and the balance of the specifications remain in full force. It is the responsibility of all respondents to conform to this addendum.

A. The City’s response to recently received questions is below:

1. Is QA requested for only the work the contractor is performing or for meter installs the City is performing as well?

City Response: QA is only required for work done by the Contractor. The City will manage the QA for the work completed by City crews.

2. We would like to request clarification regarding the 3-month waiting period outlined in Section 2.6.4 of the Technical Specifications. Specifically: Is there any flexibility to perform AMI Encoder and Transmitter installations in areas completed by the City’s MRP less than three

(3) months prior, particularly in situations where environmental conditions – such as water accumulation could potentially refill a meter box once cleaned out? Please advise if exceptions are permitted under such circumstances, and whether a case-by-case approval process would be required.

City Response: As stated in Attachment A, Technical Specifications, Section 2.6.4, ‘The Contractor shall ensure that their pace of AMI Radio Transmitter installations does not conflict with the City’s MRP.’ The intent is to allow a sufficient buffer

Sylvester Donelson, Jr. Sara Morrissey Michael Jordan Chief Procurement Officer Deputy City Administrator Chief Administrative Officer https://twitter.com/PortlandGov https://www.instagram.com/PortlandGov/ https://www.facebook.com/PortlandORGov between the City work and the Contractor work to avoid potential scheduling conflicts. The Contractor will manage the pace of its installations to maintain the three-month gap.

3. Could the City please provide the detailed MRP (Meter Replacement Program) deployment schedule, including route information? Access to the route-specific schedule will help us allocate resources effectively and develop a comprehensive installation plan that aligns with your timeline, ensures efficient coverage, and minimizes disruption to residents and businesses.

City Response: Proposers should prepare proposals based on the information already provided in the RFP. Schedule submissions should demonstrate how the Proposer intends to sequence project activities, follow the required project phasing and Area sequencing for installation, and meet the required durations and end dates set out in Attachment A – Technical Specifications, Section 1.5 Projects and Project Phases. As per Section 2.6.4 – Area Management Pace, the City intends to be twelve (12) months ahead of the Contractor’s work so Proposers do not need to reflect the MRP schedule as a constraint to their work. A detailed MRP installation schedule will be provided to shortlisted Proposers in Phase 2 of the evaluation process.

4. Does Cayenta 9.0 have an existing Mass Meter Change Out (MMCO) module?

City Response: Yes, Cayenta has Mass Meter Change Out (MMCO) functionality.

5. The price sheet attached as Attachment F is locked down and will only let me add pricing into the Cellular Radio Transmitter cells. They show line items for RF Radio Transmitter, but when I add a “Yes” to the Proposer Proposed column it gives me an error. I can enter the price, but it doesn’t populate an extended total. I can add all our pricing into the RF Radio sections. I did notice that if I do this, none of our MTU totals will populate.

City Response: Please refer to the Instructions tab in the F2 section that states:

“Items F2.1 and F2.2 allow for Proposer to propose a percentage of cellular radio transmitters…” Instead of entering ‘yes,’ please enter a percentage from 0% to 100%.

The same logic applies to items F2.3 and F2.4.

6. Regarding the answer to question 7 of Addendum #3, can the City provide guidance regarding which tabs in Attachment F would fall within the “Services” definition provided?

Products are a separately defined term that would not seem applicable to the Services goals provided.

City Response: Attachment F – Proposer Pricing Form has been updated to include a column in tabs F2, F3, F4, and F5 that identifies which items are considered “services” in this context. As such, the value of these line items will be totaled to determine the denominator in the COBID participation formula references in RFP, Section E. COBID Participation Disclosure Form.

7. I see in the RFP that references for installation and AMI in North America are required.

Can we submit references for projects with the same AMI system outside of North America or is it North America only?

City Response: No. The City wants to understand the level of experience of each Proposer in relevant projects of comparable size and scope. Experience outside of North America is not considered to be relevant.

Please direct all questions and concerns regarding this Addendum to James Moering at:

james.moering@portlandoregon.gov or by phone at: 503-823-8189

End of Addendum mailto:james.moering@portlandoregon.gov

City of Portland - NDA Page 4 of 4 03-11-25