Clarification ITB S-63500-00013826 John Day Watershed DO 102825.pdf
PDF 152 KB Posted
- Attached to
- John Day Watershed District Office Improvement
- Solicitation number
- S-63500-00013826
- Issued by
- Gilliam County, Oregon
About this file
John Day Watershed District Office Improvement - ITB S-63500-00013826
This document is a Clarifications and Addendum notice issued by the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife (ODFW) for the John Day Watershed District Office Improvement engineering project (Engineering Project #21-033). The project involves facility improvements with associated electrical, plumbing, and structural work. The invitation to bid contains no addendum items in this notice; however, the document addresses four significant clarification questions submitted by bidders. The bid closing date and time remains unchanged at Thursday, October 30, 2025 at 2:00 PM. The clarifications were prepared by Julie L. Cone of ODFW and serve as informational guidance only, not constituting changes to the ITB terms, conditions, specifications, or requirements.
The clarifications address critical technical and contractual matters for bidders. Regarding electrical work, MC cabling is prohibited on the project, and bidders must use alternative systems such as full conduit systems for branch circuit and device wiring; no further specification modifications will be issued on this matter. The project specifications document functions as a general specification containing standard ODFW project information and must be used in conjunction with the plans to understand work requirements. The General Contractor is responsible for all permit fees beyond those already paid by ODFW, including Building Permits, Planning Permits, and System Development Charges (SDCs). On Sheet C-300, a new manhole (not existing) is to be included, as clarified in Addendum 5 through removal of the "Existing" designation from the note.
View the file
Other files
Show all 27
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
CLARIFICATIONS
ITB S-63500-00013826
John Day Watershed District Office Improvement
Engineering Project # 21-033
October 28, 2025:
If supplied, this addendum modifies the Invitation to Bid (ITB) document(s) for work only to the extent indicated herein. All other areas not specifically mentioned or affected by this addendum shall remain in full force. This addendum shall be added as a part of the original ITB document(s) and shall become part of the work required.
Deleted language is shown within [brackets and strikethrough]. New language is shown in Bold and Underlined.
ADDENDUM
THERE ARE NO ADDENDUM ITEMS IN THIS NOTICE.
Closing Date and Time: Remains unchanged
Thursday, October 30, 2025 at 2:00 PM
Addendum prepared by:
Julie L. Cone julie.l.cone@odfw.oregon.gov
ITB S-63500-00013826 2
QUESTIONS:
Following are questions received from Bidders. The answers or clarifications provided below by ODFW are for informational purposes ONLY and DO NOT constitute a change to the terms, conditions, technical specifications, or requirements of the ITB.
1. Addendum 5, Question 29, and Addendum 6, Question 38 state that “MC cable will not be allowed for wiring.” However, Specification Section 26 05 19 – Low-Voltage Electrical Power Conductors and Cables, Paragraph 2.3, which permits the use and installation of MC cable, was not amended or replaced in either addendum.
Please confirm the following:
1. Is MC cable prohibited in all applications, or only for specific systems or locations (e.g., exposed areas, feeders, plenum spaces)?
2. Should contractors assume a full conduit system for all branch circuit and device wiring in lieu of MC cable?
3. Will the Owner issue a revised Section 26 05 19 or other specification clarification to align with the stated intent?
2. With the answer to question #38 of addendum #6. Are there any other specification sections within the project manual that the Owner considers generalized, or non-applicable that bidders should disregard or interpret differently?
3. Regarding the answer to Addendum 5, question 1, and Addendum 6, question 39: Since the Building
Permit and Planning Permit have been paid for, is the General Contractor responsible for reimbursing the owner for the cost of these permits? Additionally, the SDC (System Development Charges) were not addressed in the response. The City of Pendleton currently holds an outstanding invoice for SDCs owed by the project owner. Is the General Contractor responsible for paying the SDCs?
4. Sheet C-300: Are we to include a new manhole?
CLARIFICATIONS:
1. Cabling: Addendum 5 and Addendum 6 verify that MC Cabling is not allowed in this Project. The Bidder can use any other system except MC Cabling. There will be no further specification modifications.
2. The Specifications is a general specification document that contains the standard information for all
ODFW projects and should be referenced and used as such. The use of the Plans and Specifications together will describe the requirements of Work for this Project.
3. Permits: The Solicitation, Addendum 5, and Addendum 6 verify that the General Contractor is responsible for all permit fees for the project, beyond those which ODFW has already paid.
4. Manhole: Addendum 5 contains a correction to Sheet C-300 removing ‘Existing’ from the note associated to the manhole, signifying this is a new manhole to include.
| Closing Date and Time: Remains unchanged |
| Thursday, October 30, 2025 at 2:00 PM |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .