Questions Answers.pdf

FA5000‐12‐R‐0011

Questions on Sub 2:

∙ Is the intent to use the minimum amount of land allowing for stipulation for setback for the gas and water lines and for a second future transformer or is it preferred we develop the entire footprint shown on ES‐403.

It is not prefer to have the entire “footprint” shown on ES‐403 developed. The area defined on Sheet ES‐403 as “proposed new Sub 2 location” was intended to give the designer plenty of room in which to locate the new substation. For example, the new Sub 2 may end up being 70 X 80 ft on top of but larger than the old substation footprint or it may be 90 X 90 ft or 40 X 120 ft located beside the new ML&P Sub 12. The intent is best value. If there is room for the new substation in the old location with the boundaries defined by the gas line, water line, and set back from the street and that is the least expensive location to build the substation, that is where we would like it. If the new substation would be easier to build set back further from the street, there is plenty of land available.

∙ Is the requirement for space for “future” transformer to include installation of raceway as required for ties to the PCR?

No, the requirement for space for “future” transformer does not include installation of raceway to PCR.

∙ Is the new 34.5 kV feed transition from UG to OH to mimic the existing with a riser in the substation or is it to riser on Pole 51‐1?

The transitions from UG to OH are to be outside the substation. For the 34.5 kV line, a riser on pole 51‐1 is an acceptable solution.

∙ It appears on the substation one‐line that there is a transition from overhead to underground at SK‐138/JC‐1‐4 for 34.5 tie to Sub 3, but it appears that the overhead 34.5 kV continues west past Mountain View School as well as heading north towards JC‐43‐1. Where is that transition?

The transition is near the Boniface Gate, on the first pole on the west side of Vandenburg Ave. There is a riser on this ML&P pole and the switch cabinet sits to the north of the pole. The line that continues west past Mountain View School as well as heading north towards JC‐43‐1 is not energized.

∙ There are also 3 GOAB sectionalizing switches at spans east, north and west of angle point that don’t appear to be discussed. Is the plan to remove the two on the indicated segment and leave the one to the west as a isolation point or do you want them left in place or are they to be returned to ?

The 2 east and north GOAB switches shall be removed and returned to the 773d CES Ext Electric Shop. The west GOAB will be left in place.

∙ Are there plan and profile drawings or staking sheets for the existing line from 41‐9 to 41‐17 and what size of OH conductors is preferred for new OH feeder circuits.

I don’t understand the question. What does existing line from 41‐9 to 41‐17 mean? Do you mean poles 51‐9 to 51‐16? Poles 51‐9 to 51‐16 will be going UG in this contract. Feeder 43 will be installed OH in this contract, is the question about Feeder 43?

∙ Is assumption that a new 600A 12.5kV UG as defined in Note 2 on E‐601 between SC‐51‐2 and SC‐43‐1 is to be placed on this contract correct?

The new 600 A 12.5 kV line in this contract is mostly OH. It runs through the golf course.

∙ What wire size are you requesting? It takes 750 MCM copper (MV 105 as MV 90 only rated for 565 Amps) to get the 600 Amp ampacities but the largest current circuit appears to be 4/0 AWG which is much cheaper.

The amendment that requires this new line to be installed OH out of the airfield Clear Zone or underground in the existing OH powerline right of way will change the required minimum amperage of this line to 300A.

∙ Is assumption correct that a new 600A 12.5kV UG as defined in Note 1 on E‐601 for SC‐43‐1 already placed by others, as it appears there is a new switch‐ cabinet in the area without numbers?

This assumption is not correct. SC‐43‐1 is not in place. There is a junction cabinet in the location that the switch will be installed.

∙ Is 8” conduit to be installed by others per ES‐402 under Provider Dr.

in‐place and what is the depth below grade and the distance beyond the back of curb to base our estimate on and how are the ends to be marked?

The 8” conduit to be installed by others is not yet installed. It will be at 30 or 36 inches below ground level. It will be close to the curb and the ends will be marked.

∙ Should the new underground from 51‐16 to 51‐6 follow the pole line and if so what offset from the pole‐line centerline is allowed or should the least disruptive route be followed, ie miss the playground equipment?

The least disruptive route can be followed.

∙ Has the existing substation equipment been tested for PCB’s or are there any known haz‐mat materials in the substation.

There are no known haz‐mat materials in the substation.

Layout and Electrical Questions:

1. Attachment 3 ‐ Section 3.3. "Only gravel surfacing and the perimeter fences shall be permitted to be constructed within the water and gas easements". Does this mean that if the new substation 2 is constructed in the location suggested on drawing ES‐403 that the 35kV lines and the 12kV feeders must cross the water and gas lines overhead? Note that ML&P sub 12 has underground duct banks for the water and gas crossings.

The 35kV lines and the 12 kV lines may cross the water and gas lines underground.

2. Attachment 6 ‐ Section 16342 Part 1 C 2 c. "One fully equipped cubicle for future feeder circuit breaker." Should this cubicle be for a future main breaker as a transformer connection?

This cubicle is for a future feeder connection not a main breaker as a transformer connection.

3. Attachment 6 ‐ Section 16342 Part 1 C 2. If the station is designed for a possible future second transformer, should the 12.5kV switchgear have a tie breaker?

No.

4. Attachment 6 ‐ Section 13090 1.02 E. Automatic transfer switch. Is the station to be designed and constructed with a second station service source? If so where should it be connected?

An automatic transfer switch is not required in the PCR. The specifications will be amended.