Repair_Replace_Utility_Poles_-_Questions_&_Answers_30_Aug_2017.pdf
PDF 35 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Repair/Replace Utility Poles and Wiring Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA6670-17-B-0001
About this file
Repair_Replace Utility Poles - Questions & Answers
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Repair_Peplace_Utility_Poles_&_Wiring_Bid_Abstract.pdf | ||
| Repair_Replace_Utility_Poles_-_Amendment_1.pdf | ||
| Attachment_3_-_NY170011_Heavy_and_Highway_18_Aug_2017.pdf | ||
| Repair_Replace_Utility_Poles_-_Addendum_(1).pdf | ||
| Utility_Pole_Site_Visit_Sign_in_18_Aug_17.pdf | ||
| Attachment_5_-_EAL_-_Ctr_template.pdf | ||
| Attachment_4_-_Insurance_Cert.pdf | ||
| FA6670-17-B-0001_-_Utility_Poles_Solicitation.pdf | ||
| Attachment_1_-_SOW_-_Repair-Replace_Utility_Poles_and_Wiring_-_4_Oct_2016.pdf | ||
| Attachment_3_-_Heavy_and_Highway_-_8_August_2017.pdf | ||
| Attachment_2_-_Drawing_-_Comprehensive_Plan_Base_Electric_Layout,_1_sheet,_dtd_19_Apr_2017.pdf |
Show all 11
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Repair/Replace Utility Poles and Wiring
FA6670-17-B-0001
(RVKQ 17-0717)
1) The length and Class of pole needed Answer: The poles will be replaced in kind for the length of poles. The class of poles will be class 3 unless otherwise noted.
2) The species or treatment needed?
Answer: The poles will be treated southern yellow pine.
3) Do want the poles framed or unframed.
Answer: The poles will be framed where appropriate.
4) There are 2 spot light style fixtures to be replaced. They look like 1000watt HID. Can an equal LED type fixture be substituted?
Answer: The lights will be Hubbell FXL-56L-190-4K7-M-U-K-DB-PCU or equal
5) There are 3 spot/flood square style HID fixtures to be replaced. Can an equal or similar type LED fixture be substituted?
Answer: The lights will be Hubbell FXL-56L-190-4K7-M-U-K-DB-PCU or equal
6) If LED lights are substituted, 2 dissimilar fixtures will be on same poles. Should both be replaced to match?
Answer: Replace only lights identified, there are poles with multiple lights on the same pole but the report only called out to replace a “light”. The lights will have to be tested to determine the operation of both lights and only the non-operational light will be replaced.
7) Clarify the scope of work to be performed on Poles 95-1, 95-2, 95-3, 95-4 installation of triplex Answer: The triplex on pole 94, 95-2, 95-3, 95-4 has been removed from the scope in addendum 1 to the solicitation. Note: the original question did not address pole 94, this triplex extends from 94 through 95-4 and has been removed from the scope in addendum 1 to the solicitation. Note: the scope calls 95-1 as replacing the pole for 95-1, this scope has not changed. The gasket on pole 95-3 has been removed from the scope in addendum 1 to the solicitation.
8) Regarding Pole 107, do we figure on installing new transformer?
Answer: The comment for a transformer being installed has been removed from the scope in addendum 1 to the solicitation.
9) Pole 85 is to be removed according to the list. It appears to be a mistake, please advise Answer: Pole 85 is being removed from the scope in addendum 1 to the solicitation.
10) Confusion in the area of the Street lighting and Flood lighting, need the following info in all areas - Street and Flood light information needed
Answer: The street lights are to be Schreder SmartLume: SMART3-US-48L185-NW-T3M-SV-GY- PC RECEPTACLE or equal
a. Need the manufacturer type of Flood Light and Street Light that you are requesting on all replacement requests, to include whether they are to be LED, High Pressure Sodium, or Mercury Vapor. We are suggesting LED’s. Please let us know the manufacturer type as there are literally dozens Answer: See item 10 above for full light description
(RVKQ 17-0717) RFI’s
b. What the Wattage is to be for all sites. There was only one light that it was visible what the existing wattage is, all other sites there was nothing. We are Suggesting 150 Watt for all locations.
Answer: See item 10 above for full light description
c. With the street lights to be replaced we need to know what the length in feet the light standard is to
be. The documents do not contain this info and it was not obtainable on the walk down. We could just decide for a mix of both 7ft and 10ft Light Standards.
Answer: Use wood utility pole mounting arm with a length of 10’, the individual fixtures will be verified during inspection.
d. In quite a few places the document referenced to replace a lighting fixture, however when we visited the structure it was found the have two lights of either a street light or flood light existing. Please clarify which light was to be replaced or change documents to reflect both light replacements. Some of the structure numbers are: 13-2, 68-1, 114-3 and 116-1, I do believe there to be a few more also.
Answer: One light is to be replaced at each pole identified, where multiple lights are mounted on one pole, the lights will be inspected by the Contractor to verify the non-functioning light. In the case of both lights being non-functioning it will be addressed through the Contracting Officer at that time.
11) Confusion in the area of “Triplex is bad and Triplex shot” from Poles 94 to 95-4 - Comments on bad triplex.
Answer: The triplex from pole 94, 95-2, 95-3, 95-4 has been removed from the scope in addendum 1 to the solicitation.
a. What size triplex is requesting to be installed? We are suggesting #2
b. Pole 94 has the existing Tangent triplex tied off to an existing street light, at what point is the replacement to take place? Suggest that 94 be made a double dead end and replace the triplex going towards pole 95-4 with like in kind of construction that exists at the current poles
c. Need the footages that exist in the field from pole 94 to 95-4
12) Confusion in the area of what the scope is at Structure 144-1 - Triplex feeding quarters bad, tree needs trim Answer: This item has been removed from the scope in addendum 1 to the solicitation.
a. We understand the service drop feeding the referenced building was just done, so that couldn’t be it.
b. We seen where the secondary is pulled back by the tree that’s understood, is that the triplex referenced “bad”? Is it only that one span? Couldn’t see any “bad’ Secondary triplex. Please clarify.
13) Confusion on guying at Structure 0-3 - Needs back guy wire pole leaning due to:
a. Guy wires are in place going in one direction, very tight and pole is leaning away from that point
b. No guy wires exist going the other way because there are no anchors present to attach to. Pole is severely leaning. Documents do not say to install an anchor, only a guy. When looking at the site it seems it could be difficult to install an anchor and guy due to existing underground vaults and possible conduits. Clarification is needed.
(RVKQ 17-0717) RFI’s Answer: A guy wire and anchor are to be install on the south side (or as determined by design) of the pole to stabilize the pole. All utilities will be located and the contractor will ensure the guy wire and anchor system is sized and located to properly and safely stabilize the pole.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .