CMU 2767 Addendum 1.pdf

CMU 2767

Campus Energy Infrastructure Addendum #1 07/19/2023

1. We would like to know if we are able to get selected for the implementation “work packages” as the Consulting Partner, would that preclude us from actually doing the work throughout the project?

a. CMU views hiring a consulting partner through this solicitation, no different than hiring any other architect or engineering consultant. CMU intends to pick the consultant that provides best value to CMU, before negotiating fee. Thus, the consulting partner hired through this solicitation would be afforded an opportunity to negotiate fee with CMU for performing full design and contracting services for future work packages.

2. CMU is considering in the list: FCA, we know that FOS/Cannon Design won that last year, did you have Canon Design do that or are you looking to do another FCA?

a. The solicitation to hire a consultant to provide an FCA for CMU was cancelled. CMU still needs a complete Facilities Condition Assesment for our main campus.

3. Is CMU looking for a development partner for the proposed infrastructure improvements and capital projects, such that financial investment and long term ownership of energy infrastructure (and/or other facilities) will be the result of the collaboration with CMU (such as P3-type arrangements) or is the University looking for consulting and turnkey services only?

a. CMU has been intentionally vague in this regard. Yes, CMU is interested in a P3-type arrangment, if it proivdes best value for the university. If not, CMU may choose a more traditional path to construct projects in the Formation District.

4. What is the anticipated timeline for implementation of the project list included on page 3 of the

RFQ?

a. The timing of projects will vary and will be decided once our consulting partner is under contract and has an opportunity to take a holistic view of our needs. Best case scenario for CMU would include having full sets of construction and bidding documents available to drill new bore fields and install new central loop piping for bidding no later than January 2024.Other projects anticipated in the soliciation will follow as details on projects costs and available funding are solidified.

5. Which types of project delivery methods are anticipated? The RFQ mentions IPD but Design Bid

Build and Energy Performance Contracts were also mentioned in the meeting.

a. Integrated Project Delivery is mentioned in the soliciation, but may not be the perfect solution for all projects. A Design/Bid/Build (D/B/B) delivery method may work best for drilling new bore fields, while a Consrtuction Manger/General Contractor (CMGC) may be the most advantageous delivery method for the work necessary to install new central loop piping. IPD may be the most advantageous delivery method for a future P3.

6. Is the University’s intent to have the design consultants selected under this RFQ provide initial planning and design and then integrate with an IPD team with a separate IPD contract on specific work packages?

a. Yes, in part. The consultant hired through this soliciation will be tasked with providing initial planning, design, cost estimating, funding solutions, life cycle costing, etc. for each anticipated project. CMU, in consultation with the contracting partner hired through this solicitation, may decide to hire a design firm to provide full sets of construction documents and work directly with a contracting firm to deliver a specific project, while opting for an IPD delivery method for another project. The delivery method for each project will be decided by CMU and our consulting partner.

7. Does the ideal team responding to this RFQ include energy performance contractors or energy service contractors in addition to designers for any EPC work? Or would all contractors be brought in a separate process?

a. CMU does not have a preconceived notion on what type of firm would be the best fit for this project. The firm hired as a consultant partner will be tasked with providing initial design services, project costing, life cycle costing, funding options, etc. that CMU will use to make informed decisions on which projects are moved forward. The consultant hired through this soliciation will be afforded an opportunity to provide turn key services for certain projects, if doing so provides best value to the university.

8. The request asks for a partner consisting of developers, architects, and engineers. In the schedule, you discuss negotiation and contracting for A/E services. The project approach requires a “guarantee” of incentives and tax credits. Is it the University’s intent to award this project to an Energy Service Company (ESCO) or an A/E consulting team? It appears more written for a team that would potentially hold a construction contract for the execution of future projects. Please confirm.

a. The solicitation requests firms “demonstrate” the ability to provide financial and performance guarantees for tax credits and energy savings from similar projects they have completed in the past. Please refer to CMU’s response to questions 6 and 7 regarding the university’s intent to award to an ESCO or an AE consulting team.

9. We would like to know if we are able to get selected for the implementation “work packages” as the

Consulting Partner, would that preclude us from actually doing the work throughout the project?

a. Please refer to CMU’s response to question 1.

10. Is there an opportunity to visit campus prior to bids being due?

a. Yes, a self-guided campus visit can be scheduled for interested firms.

11. Can a copy of the pre-bid PPT be posted to BidNet?

a. A copy of the pre-bid PPT is attached to this addendum.

End Addendum #1