Q A__2_ _Clarifications_as_of_6_Feb.pdf

CLARIFICATIONS

& new Q&A (#24-26)

As of 6 Feb 2015

FA4608-15-R-0006 AWUB 07-0110

Repair Electrical Equipment with Pad Mounted on Davis Rd

Question #4 about PMS 10-4840 see revised response giving feeder sizes to the riser (parallel 350MCM primary cable), the manhole (parallel 350MCM primary cable) and the transformer (#2 AWG primary cable).

Question #9 about the existing manhole see revised response. The revised SOW still requires 3 new manholes and stipulates spacing requirements that must be met and approved.

Question #17 about panels see revised response. The paragraph beginning with “Also” was deleted.

Questions and Answers (revised #4, #9, #15, #17)

FA4608-15-R-0006 AWUB 07-0110

Repair Electrical Equipment with Pad Mounted on Davis Rd

1) Is this a follow-on requirement? If so, could you please provide the incumbent contract number for this opportunity? If not, is this a new requirement?

This is a new requirement

2) Will there be a site visit?

Please refer to the solicitation:

A site visit will be held on 26 Jan 15 at 09:00AM at the 2d Contracting Squadron, 801 Kenney Ave, Suite 2300, Barksdale AFB, LA 71110. Please contact Mrs. Barbara Makamson at (318) 456-2430 to confirm attendance and number of personnel attending. For contractors without base access, please report to the East Gate (Industrial Drive/Contractor’s Gate) on the day of the visit by 8:30 to be signed on.

3) In the SOW for the above referenced project refers to drawings, how do we get a set of these to use for this project?

The drawings have been added as of 22 Jan 2015.

****Revised 4) Can we assume that there is enough length on the existing primary cables to terminate to the proposed Vista switch PMSl0-4840.

No pull new primary (concrete encased duct bank) to closest source. #1, #12

Source being riser, transformer and manhole – feeder size for manhole and riser is parallel 350MCM and #2 to transformer.

5) How long of a shutdown will be given to replace the existing PSMl0-4840 with a new Vista switch. (It is the Contractor’s understanding that the existing concrete pad is not large enough, the existing conduits will need to be shifted, all terminations will need to be changed and the counterpoise will need to be extended.)

#6 SOW/Minimize outage time. When time comes the Contractor will propose outage plan for approval.

6) Will the Government allow for the roadway to be bored or will the roadway need to be cut and re-poured?

Saw cut roadways. Civil SOW was added (posted on 2 Feb 2015)

7) Contractor did not see where the SOW calls for pathways for the CATV or phone lines that will be removed when the poles come down. Will pathways for these lines be a part of this contract?

No, this is the responsibility of the user. The Contractor does need to coordinate with all involved to lessen outage time before demo.

8) Light fixtures are mounted to the poles that are to be removed. Will new street lights be a part of this contract?

No street lights, exit door lights instead. See item #2, page 3

****Revised 9) It was mentioned at the site visit that the contractor can utilize the existing abandoned manhole as part of this project. Will this be added to the SOW?

Yes, it was added. See #14 in the revised SOW (posted 2 February 2015)

Revised SOW requires 3 new manholes for adequate spacing to meet minimum spacing requirements

10) Where will the new 1600AMP switchboard be located?

MDP will be located inside new electrical room. See paragraph 1, page 2 of the SOW

11) The SOW does not state which panels will need to be replaced. Will the Government provide a list and location of the required new panels?

Please see the revised SOW (posted 2 February 2015), first paragraph on page 2 – replace all electrical equipment

12) Can the manhole be changed to 8’x8’x8’?

Yes, see #13 of the revised SOW (posted 2 February 2015)

13) NEC does not allow unfused electrical service to be run thru a building, unless concrete encased. What is the desired solution to correct this?

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015)

14) During the site visit, Base CE indicated that the existing manhole at the north end of building 4186 could be used instead of supplying new manholes 2 & 3. Is this correct?

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015)

**** Revised 15) Can directional bore be used for duct crossings at Wilbur Wright and Rickenbacker?

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015)

Also, please see additional info at Question #25

16) It appears that the 8 panels shown on sheet E-3 are to be re-fed from the new mdp.

The two training room panels are to be replaced with new. Is the alternate price for five additional panels the remaining 5 panels shown on sheet E-3?

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015)

****Revised 17) Please clarify the following statement from page 2 of the SOW. Is the intent to provide all new power panels? Is the intent to replace panels near life expectancy?, or is the intent to price the replacement of the five panels shown to be existing on sheet e3

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015).

DELETED paragraph

18) As the SOW calls for coordination study, arc flash study, and short circuit study, are the fault currents for feeder 10 available?

Please refer to Amendment 2 - Feeder 10 fault current info added to solicitation on 28 Jan 2015.

19) Is there a standard for the “pull box”?

Pull box example (Oldcastle or equivalent) added as attachment on 3 Feb 2015.

20) The duration is listed at 180 days. Can this be extended, as the switches are long lead time?

For long lead items, two Notices to Proceed can be issued. One for materials and one to start work.

21) Based on the site visit findings, is there any possibility that the statement of work and scope of work can be changed to incorporate all the ‘unknowns’ that were discovered during the walk through?

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015)

22) Per NEC a disconnect switch (fuse) will be required between the transformer and the switchboard. Where will this disconnect switch be installed? The statement of work does not address this.

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015)

23) Regarding the area currently occupied by the AF Museum, how much of the existing service do you want removed? At site visit, open junction boxes, existing conduit and wiring were visible, but it was not explained what part of this existing service would be removed under the SOW.

Please refer to the revised SOW (posted 2 Feb 2015)

Additional Questions and Answers

24) Are we still supposed to furnish a line item estimate for 5 panels? This was removed in the revised statement of work, but was eluded back to in the answer to question 17. If we are supposed to furnish a separate line item estimate, the bid form should be modified. We will need details on the sizes, features and characteristics of the five panels along with details as to whether or not the feeders to these five panels will require replacement as well.

The correct answer to question #17 was to refer to the revised SOW posted 2 Feb 2015, page

2. The other paragraph was deleted. No change in bid form.

All equipment was available for inspection at the site visit.

25) We do not have information as to the number of, sizes of, and types of breakers in the existing panels to be replaced. What do you want to base our bid price on as it relates to branch breakers for the new panels?

There are no electrical one line drawings for B4173. Bid price should include all breakers required to service existing electrical load. All equipment was available for inspection at the site visit.

26) In the answer to question #17, there is a statement that states, "If the panel is near life expectancy, the Contractor shall change it." What panel or panel(s) does this statement refer to?

The correct answer to question 17 was to refer to the revised SOW posted 2 Feb 2015 page 2. The "near life expectancy" statement was removed from the revised statement of work.

27) Since Wilbur Wright is a heavily traveled road, and the SOW requires the primary duct bank to cross this road, will it be acceptable to bore and install a steel casing large enough to handle the individual 6” ducts and then pump concrete fill into the steel casing around the 6” ducts?

It is acceptable to bore and install steel casing large enough to handle the primary duct bank requirement and then pump concrete fill as long as the concrete requirement of 3” encasement around the 6” ducts/duct bank is met. The Contractor shall provide detail drawings of this proposed method for Wilbur Wright primary duct bank road bore for Government approval prior to bore. Steel casing must be Schedule 40 or greater.