SF-30,_Amendment_0005.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE Page of Pages

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

09/08/2017

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NO. 5. PROJECT NO.

20-C0863

6. ISSUED BY CODE: 00020

Department of the Interior

Bureau of Reclamation/Mid-Pacific Region Office

2800 Cottage Way

Sacramento, California 95825-1898

7. ADMINISTERED BY CODE: 00020

Department of the Interior

Bureau of Reclamation/Mid-Pacific Region Office

2800 Cottage Way

Sacramento, California 95825-1898

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

X

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

R17PS00307

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

07/18/2017

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of offers (X) is extended () is not extended.

Offerors must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE

RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (if required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS, IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS

DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO:

THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor ( ) is not, ( ) is required to sign and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible)

The Solicitation cited in block 9A above, Shasta and Keswick Powerplants Excitation System Replacements is hereby amended.

Purpose: The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the attached: 1) Q&As, 2) revised Specification No. 20-C0863, 3) revised

Sections B&M, 4) drawings, and 5) Extend the offer due date.

The date and time for receipt of offers is hereby EXTENDED to September 27, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. from September 20, 2017 at

2:00 p.m.

The offeror must acknowledge this amendment by submitting a signed copy of this SF30 along with their proposal.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

Rosana Yousef Goarji, Contracting Officer

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

NSN 7540-01-152-807030-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE Prescribed by GSA

MICROSOFT WORD VERSION

Continuation Page for

Specifications No. 20-C0863

Amendment 0005

Instructions for SF-30

Block 14 Continued

Solicitation

Revised drawings to be removed and replaced:

None

New drawings to be added:

No. 214-M-214-188-46

No. 214-214-11482

No. T-8006496

No. P-6999537

Drawings to be removed:

Revised solicitation sections to be removed and replaced:

Remove: Replace:

Section B Section B, Amendment 0005

Section M Section M, Amendment 0005

Revised specifications sections to be removed and replaced:

Remove: Replace:

Table of Contents Table of Contents, Amendment 0005

Section 01 11 00 Section 01 11 00, Amendment 0005

Section 01 33 00 Section 01 33 00, Amendment 0005

Section 01 54 20 Section 01 54 20, Amendment 0005

Section 01 78 30 Section 01 78 30, Amendment 0005

Section 01 79 20 Section 01 79 20, Amendment 0005

Section 05 12 10 Section 05 12 10, Amendment 0005

Section 05 12 73 Section 05 12 73, Amendment 0005

Section 05 14 00 Section 05 14 00, Amendment 0005

Section 26 05 02 Section 26 05 02, Amendment 0005

Section 26 05 10 Section 26 05 10, Amendment 0005

Section 26 05 20 Section 26 05 20, Amendment 0005

Section 26 05 33 Section 26 05 33, Amendment 0005

Section 26 05 36 Section 26 05 36, Amendment 0005

Section 26 05 38 Section 26 05 38, Amendment 0005

Section 26 25 10 Section 26 25 10, Amendment 0005

Section 26 25 13 Section 26 25 13, Amendment 0005

Section 48 19 80, Amendment 0002 Section 48 19 80, Amendment 0005

Section 51 00 04 Section 51 00 04, Amendment 0005

Section 51 00 05 Section 51 00 05, Amendment 0005

Section 52 00 00 Section 52 00 00, Amendment 0005

New specifications sections to be added:

Specifications sections to be removed:

Section 01 31 30

Section 51 00 06

Section 51 00 07

Section 51 00 08

Section 51 00 09

Section 51 00 10

Section 51 02 83

Section 51 02 84

Amendment No. 0005 to Solicitation No. R17PS00307

Shasta and Keswick Powerplants Excitation System Replacements

Central Valley Project, California

Questions and Answers

Question 1: Section 01 11 00, items 1.02 B+I. These paragraphs specify uniform AVR and

HMI, i.e., same make, model and manufacturer as well as using the same manufacturer and model for each component with the same function for all units.

In section 48 19 80, items 2.01 and 2.02 you specify Basler equipment for the work at the Shasta units à Is it the USBR intention and expectation that the prime bidder shall furnish DECS 2100 and Basler upgrade packages for the Shasta units and therefore per section 01 11 00, items 1.02

B+I all units at Keswick must also be DECS 2100? Please confirm.

Response 1: See revised Section 01 11 00.

Question 2: Item 2.02 in section 48 19 80: Please provide bill of material of the existing excitation system so we can evaluate and design the controls upgrade for these Shasta units #

1+2. As a minimum we require the manufacturer and part number for the Thyristor Bridge and the SCR.

Response 2: See added Section 51 00 04 Bill of Materials

Question 3: Drawing 214-D-4383 includes a note to “Refer to plan view of Dwg 214-D-22146 and Section Views on drawing 214-D-22145 for proposed excitation layout.” Please provide drawings 214-D-22145, and 214-D-22146.

Response 3: These drawings are in Section J, attachment 4 of the Solicitation.

Question 4: It isn’t clear what should be included in CLIN 2 – Basic Electrical Materials and

Methods. It seems that everything required by the measurement and payment section of this

CLIN is already covered under other multiple CLINs. Please provide clarification what should be included in each of this CLIN.

Response 4: See revised Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices/Cost, and Section

26 05 02, Article 1.01.

Question 5: Will the government provide AutoCAD files for all drawings that the contractor is responsible for updating under this contract?

Response 5: For the drawings that the Government has in AutoCAD, the Government will provide them to the contractor.

Question 6: What annunciation points are required to be hardwired back to the control room?

There could be close 100 per unit.

Response 6: The excitation annunciation alarms shall be hard wired at both powerplants

(Keswick and Shasta) from the units excitation system to its respective annunciator

(located in the Control Room). At Shasta, there are two annunciators per unit; one in the

Control Room and the second in the Governor cabinets. The excitation annunciation alarms at the Governor cabinets can have an HMI and communicated interface from the

Control Room to its respective Governor cabinet. See revised Section 48 19 80, Article

1.04.

Question 7: Should the contractor replace the 15kV connections at the generator at Shasta?

Response 7: The connections are subject to contractor design. Reference Section 26 25

10, Article 1.04, Paragraph B. Reference Section 26 25 10, Article 2.01, Paragraph A.1,2.

Reference Section 26 25 13 Removing and Modifying Existing Equipment, Part 3, 3.02.B

"...The contractor shall provide new bus extensions for all ends of each existing bus."

Question 8: Should the contractor replace the bus connections to the field at Shasta?

Response 8: See question 7.

Question 9: Are the pole pieces, to be removed from Keswick, removable without pulling the rotor?

Response 9: DC machine field pole pieces are removable without removing the rotor.

Question 10: Can the locations of the Asbestos and Lead containing areas be identified at both

Keswick and Shasta?

Response 10: Known locations of the Asbestos and Lead containing areas identified at both Keswick and Shasta, can be found in Section 02 82 20 - Removal and Disposal of

Asbestos Containing Materials: Part 1, 1.07.A, Section 02 83 33 - Removal and Disposal of Equipment with Coatings Containing Heavy Metals, Part 1, 1.08, A, D, E and F. And

Section 26 25 13 - Removing and Modifying Existing Equipment, Part 1, 1.05.A, B and

C. Sections 02 82 20 and 02 82 33 require the contractor to perform independent samples of the project scope of work. Any additional area requiring mitigation will be dealt with via modification to the contract. Reference Section 51 02 83, Article 1.02 and Section 51

02 84 for an order of precedence and responsibility clarification.

Question 11: Would you please clarify the requirements for Section B.1 CLIN 8, the “Spare

Parts,” in specific as it regards the quantities required? The reference in the Solicitation’s

SECTION C - Specifications No. 20-C0863, Section 48 19 80B, Article 1.11.A.3 reads “Furnish spare parts per facility listed in Table 48 19 80B - Spare Parts.” Is there a requirement for two separate tables of spare parts, one set for the Keswick Powerplant and a separate set for the

Shasta Powerplant – or is the content of the Table 48 19 80B the total of the required spare parts for the whole project?

Response 11: Per Section 48 19 80, Part 1, 1.11.A.3, Furnish spare parts per facilities listed in Table 48 19 80B - Spare Parts." There will be two sets of spare parts; one for

Keswick powerplant and one for Shasta powerplant and unique information reflected in the pertinent submittals.

Question 12: What is the USBR rationale for including the Keswick units in this solicitation?

These are of complete different vintage and OEM and don’t seem to have any connection to the

Basler equipment at Shasta. Please explain.

Response 12: Acknowledged. No change to solicitation scope.

Question 13: Price schedule Section B: Which bid item should include the asbestos and lead paint sampling, removal and abatement?

Response 13: Per Sections 02 82 20 and 02 83 33, Part 1, 1.01.A.1, "Include cost in prices offered in the Price Schedule for work that may require asbestos removal."

Question 14: 01 11 00 - Item 1.02 B+I. The modified section of 48 19 80 (per amendment

0002) does now allow for Basler or equal. However this item (1.02 B+I) stipulate that all exciters for Shasta and Keswick must be of the same brand, i.e., Basler or equal. Please confirm.

Response 14: See question 1 and revised Section 01 11 00 - Summary of Work.

Question 15: 05 12 73 - Item 1.04 D 2: Please provide the site specific values of Fa, Fv, S1, Ss and SDS for the Shasta and Keswick locations.

Response 15: See revised Section 05 12 73

Question 16: 48 19 80 - Item 2.02: Please provide bill of material of the existing excitation system so we can evaluate and design the controls upgrade for the Shasta units # 1+2 and units #

S1+2. As a minimum we require the manufacturer and part number for the thyristor bridge and the SCR.

· Item 2.20: Please provide qty. and model number of the existing brushes and brush holders to be replaced.

Response 16: For the Bill of Materials list, please refer to response to Question 2. The number of brushes for Shasta Units 3, 4 and 5 are: 36 per unit (18 per ring). Refer to new specification drawing 214-214-11482. For Keswick Units 1, 2 and 3, there are 6 brushes per unit. The Keswick brush information can be found on the new specification drawings

T-8006496 and P-6999537.

Question 17: For Keswick U1-U3, please clarify if seismic ratings are required for the removable cable tray that will carry the DLO from the new PPT to the generator field or if an installation similar to what has been done at Spring Creek is acceptable.

Response 17: Yes the new removable cable tray systems will need meet local seismic ratings. Refer to specification requirements in Section 26 05 36 Keswick Removable

Cable Tray Systems, Part 1, 1.04.A.5.

Question 18: Shasta: Please provide photos of the generator neutral CT’s. There was no access available during the site visit, and it is our understanding that they are to be replaced.

Response 18: Reference drawing sheet 84. Photos are not available at this time

Question 19: Shasta: Please confirm that there is no need to provide new 15.5KV & 600V bus duct or connections if they can be reused in the new design.

Response 19: Refer to responses to questions 7 and 8.

Question 20: Keswick: Please provide a photo of the bus duct nameplate for the duct that connects the HV to the PPT.

Response 20: Existing busway salient characteristics: 6,900 operating volts, 2,100 amperes, 60 cycles.

Question 21: Keswick: Please confirm that if the location of the PPT remains unchanged that the HV bus duct feeding the PPT, the LV cable feeding the exciter, and the DC cables feeding the collector rings must be replaced. Alternatively, please confirm that if the PPT is close coupled to the exciter then it is understood that new HV bus duct interconnections must be made and new HV bus duct must feed the PPT, and the DC cables feeding the collector rings must be replaced.

Response 21: If the location of the PPT remains unchanged, the HV bus duct feeding the

PPT, the LV cable feeding the exciter and the DC cables feeding the collector rings will still need to be replaced and upgraded, because the existing Keswick PPTs will need to be replaced and upgraded. Refer to specification requirements in Section 48 19 80, Part 1, 1.09.A and B and Part 2, 2.04.D.6, and Part 3, 3.03.H. If the Keswick PPTs are coupled to the exciter, per specification requirements in Section 48 19 80, Part 2, 2.04.D.6 "...the contractor shall confirm and modify the bus and cable routings for the high and low sides of each new PPT." Also refer to specification Sections 26 05 10 Conductors and Cables, Part 2, 2.08, and 22 25 10 Metal-Enclosed Bus, Part 1, 1.04.F.

Question 22: Please confirm if PT’s are to be replaced. If so, please provide photos of each type / arrangement.

Response 22: Photos are not available at this time. Reference drawing sheets 33 and 82.

Question 23: Please confirm if it is acceptable to replace the existing hard-wired annunciators in the control room with an HMI and communicated interface.

Response 23: See question 6.

Question 24: The specification requires the following:

The Offeror shall provide each reference with a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire

(PPQ) in Section J and have the reference return the PPQ to the Bureau of Reclamation in accordance with instructions at the end of the form.

Is it acceptable for a bidder to provide copies of current past performance questionnaires directly to the USBR that were obtained for a current solicitation with similar scope associated with another active opportunity within the USBR?

Response 24: Yes, the offerors are allowed to submit PPQ for a current solicitation with similar scope associated with another active opportunity within the USBR.

Question 25: Section 01 14 30 paragraph 1.03 B states that “April 15 through October 15 may have availability on a case by case basis.” The bidder requests that the Government clarify whether these intervals should not be considered as available for outages in the bidder’s proposal.

Response 25: See Section 01 14 30. Contractor should provide proposal based on winter outage (October 15 - April 15).

Question 26: There are two questions with regards to the monthly progress payments specified in Clause 52.232-5 (b) (2):

a. Will the Contracting Officer authorize monthly payments to the Contractor based upon work completed during that invoice period?

- Or –

b. Will the Contracting Officer authorize payments to the Contractor after the completion of each

CLIN?

Response 26: Monthly progress payments will be based on percentage of work completed during the invoice period. Payments will not be made for forecasted work.

Question 27: If asbestos containing materials are encountered during the execution will the government hire a separate contractor for the abatement?

Response 27: Refer to response to Question 10. The Government does not intend to hire a separate contractor for Asbestos mitigation.

Question 28: Keswick: Drawings for the 6.9 KV bus duct are requested to develop a solution for the location of the newly supplied PPT. It is preferred to locate the PPT adjacent to the excitation cabinet, but the drawings will help to evaluate the possibility of relocating the PPT.

Response 28: Refer to new specification drawings: sheets 270, 272 and 273.

Question 29: Keswick: the current transformer ratio for operation of the AVR has been specified to be 1400:5. This will develop less than the nominal current of the generator and is not an IEEE standard ratio. Please confirm.

Response 29: See revised Section 48 19 80, Article 2.14. Revised to 5,000:5 A. and refer to sheet 33.

Question 30: Keswick: the three line wiring diagram incorporates some blue notes, and these notes are specifying the replacement of most of the bus duct flexible links including those associated with the GSU transformer, generator circuit breaker and potential transformers. There is not a contract clause in the specification to address the requirements for these replacements.

Please clarify and confirm the replacement of the bus duct flexible links.

Response 30: The three line wiring diagram is for information only and the blue note

GSU bus duct flexible links are not included in this project.

Question 31: Shasta: Drawing 214-D-4383 in Attachment 4 of the solicitation includes red notes, and these notes refer to two other drawings for the proposed excitation system layout.

Please provide those drawings (214-D-22146 & 214-D-22145).

Response 31: See response to Question #3.

Question 32: Power and control cables rated at 600V and below have been specified to have a halogen free jacket. Instrumentation cables have been specified to have black PVC jacket (that is not halogen free). Please clarify if these differing requirements are intended.

Response 32: See revised Section 26 05 10.

Question 33: Please confirm if the generator PT’s and CT’s are to be replaced for the partial upgrades (AVR and HMI).

Response 33: No, the generator PTs and CTs are not to be replaced for the partial upgrades (AVR and HMI) for Shasta Units 1, 2 and Station Service Units S1 and S2. See revised Section 48 19 80.

Question 34: Can the partial upgrade excitation systems reuse internal control wires?

Response 34: Yes, the partial upgrade excitation systems (Shasta Units 1, 2 and Station

Service Units S1 and S2) will reuse internal control wires.

Question 35: Please provide estimated lengths for the control and power cables for the new excitation Systems.

Response 35: Refer to Section J, Attachment 5 - Keswick Cable Information, and

Attachment 6 - Shasta Cable Information. Between these attachments and the arrangement drawings (Sheets 4 - 14 for Keswick powerplant and Sheets 54 - 72 for

Shasta powerplant), realistic lengths for the control and power cables can be generated.

Reference to Section 52 00 00 - Drawings, Articles 1.01 and 1.02 and 51 00 00 -

Information Available to Offerors, Article 1.01.

Question 36: Please advise if the device for pole swapping can be a manually operated mechanical device.

Response 36: The Government wants manually operated swapping.

Question 37: Please provide cable schedules with routings.

Response 37: See response to Question 35.

Question 38: Are the existing drawings to be updated? If so, please identify the quantity of drawings that require modification.

Response 38: Reference to Section 01 11 00, Article 1.02, Paragraph H requiring

'Furnish drawings and data: Includes revision to Government drawings external to excitation system to address requirements of turn-key installation.' The electrical specification drawings (Sheets 15 - 53 for Keswick powerplant and Sheets 73 - 116 for

Shasta powerplant) are examples of existing drawings that may need to be updated. The exciter specification drawings (Sheets 117 - 143 for one of Keswick's units, Sheets 144 -

185 for Shasta Unit 1, and Sheets 186 - 223 for Shasta Unit 3) are examples of drawings that may be updated and/or replaced, for each respective unit at each powerplant.

Question 39: Which form of control compensation is required: reactive cross current compensation or reactive current droop compensation?

Response 39: The Government wants reactive cross current compensation or 'reactive differential compensator' per the definition in IEEE 421.1 - 2007 (Spec Section 48 19 80, Part 1 - 1.02.D.1)

Question 40: It is understood that the specified communication protocol of DMP3 is in error and DNP3 is what is required. Please clarify.

Response 40: DNP 3 is required. See revised Section 48 19 80.

Question 41: Low voltage windings are what are typically subjected to higher temperatures due to much higher currents. Please clarify if temperature supervision for LV windings, only, is acceptable.

Response 41: Supervision of LV windings is acceptable. Removed requirement to monitor HV windings. See revised Section 48 19 80.

Question 42: The noise requirement of 50dB is not aligned with IEEE standards, so it is our understanding that IEEE determinations would supersede this extremely low noise requirement.

Please clarify if compliance with IEEE noise requirements will suffice.

Response 42: See revised Section 48 19 80.

Question 43: Can the excitation transformer protection relay be door mounted instead of rack mounted?

Response 43: See revised Section 48 19 80 permitting rack or panel mounting of the excitation transformer protection relay.

Question 44: Please confirm that the UL 489 standard is sufficient for the excitation breaker.

Response 44: UL 489 is sufficient if the Contractor Design proposes a fixed mount insulated case power circuit breaker for Keswick. UL 1066 is required for Shasta.

Question 45: Please clarify the range of voltages that are acceptable for the secondary supply for the cooling fans.

Response 45: Range of voltage is subject to contractor design to satisfy the requirements of Section 48 19 80, Article 2.11, Paragraph D.

Question 46: Is it acceptable to use PLC analog outputs to provide field voltage and field current signals?

Response 46: Field meters and SCADA interface require a hardwired signal for reliable communication of the field voltage and current. The PLC should provide an analog output for the field voltage and current in accordance with Section 48 19 80, Article 2.15.

Question 47: Please provide pictures of the installation location and also the nameplate data for the new generator CT’s and PT’s to be installed.

Response 47: Specification requirements for CTs and PTs are provided. Photos are not available at this time.

Question 48: Section 01 11 00 Part 1, 1.02.A.4.b - The requirement to replace the HMI only may be an issue since the HMI only serves to display the information that is actually stored in the regulator itself. Moreover, a given vendors excitation system HMI is usually configured to function only with that vendor’s respective regulator and not with another vendor’s regulator. As a result, in order to fulfill this section of the specification, would you prefer that we provide our regulator, I/O module and bridge driver boards as well as the new HMI requested?

Response 48: Refer to revised Section 01 11 00 Part 1, 1.02.A.4.b where the HMI and

AVR are to be replaced for the Shasta Units 1, 2 and Station Service Units S1 and S2.

Question 49: Section 48 19 80 Part 1.04.Q - Instead of the enunciator panels for each unit in the control room, would you prefer one (1) HMI mounted in the control room of the Shasta station to view the alarms and operator all of the Shasta units and one (1) HMI in the Keswick station control room to view the alarms and operator all three (3) of the Keswick units?

Response 49: See response to questions 6 and 23. Entire plant annunciator replacement by HMI is not in the scope of this project.

Question 50: Section 48 19 80 Part 1.05. M - For the DC filed polarity reversal switch, would you prefer an offline polarity reversal switch or a busbar configuration that would allow for polarity reversal?

Response 50: Either an offline polarity reversal switch or busbar configuration (also performed offline) would be acceptable.

Question 51: Section 48 19 80 Part 1.11. A - Would it be acceptable to include a fully assembled redundant fan set on the bridge assembly (Item 3) instead of a separate fan unit (Item 7)?

Response 51: Exceeding the specification requirements is acceptable at no additional cost to the Government.

Question 52: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.01. A.2.a - Would you prefer the redundant regulators be independent of the bridges such that either regulator can function with either bridge in order to provide a better and more complete redundancy?

Response 52: Exceeding the specification requirements is acceptable at no additional

Question 53: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.01.A.3 - Would you prefer a bridge redundancy scheme of (N+1) where both bridges run at the same time thereby providing even wear but, in the unlikely event that one bridge should fail, there is still a “bumpless” and automatic transfer to the remaining bridge thereby maintaining full redundancy.

Response 53: Exceeding the specification requirements is acceptable at no additional

Question 54: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.01.A.3. - Would you prefer the bridges be independent of the regulators? Thus instead of one regulator tied to one specific bridge and the other bridge tied to the other regulator, would you prefer an arrangement where either regulator can function with either bridge providing a better and more complete redundancy?

Response 54: Exceeding the specification requirements is acceptable at no additional

Question 55: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.01.A.4.b - Would a 15 inch color screen with touch technology be acceptable?

Response 55: See revised Spec Section 48 19 80

Question 56: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.01.A.19 - Would you prefer that the bridges be fully withdrawable in an off-line manner in order to facilitate fast replacement or repair?

Response 56: Acknowledged, this item is subject to contractor's design.

Question 57: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.05.B - Could we locate the SEL0787 relay mounted on the control cubicle door of the excitation system since that cabinet contains lower voltage and would permit safe access to this relay, if required?

Response 57: See revised Section 48 19 80. Either location as worded will permit low voltage access.

Question 58: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.26.B - Would you prefer full floor to ceiling plates on both sides of each bridge cabinet along with a full length plate on the bridge cabinet rear to provide a physical barrier to mitigate any arc flash?

Response 58: Provide barriers within excitation enclosure in accordance with Section 48

13 85, Article 2.26, Paragraph B, 'Barrier in cubicles between circuits utilizing 240 Volts or greater and lower voltage circuits.' This applies to the SCR bridge cubicles.

Question 59: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.27.B - In lieu of a completely white interior cabinet, could we paint all of the mounting plates inside the cabinet white?

Response 59: The interior of the cabinets shall be white in accordance with Section 48

19 80 - Part 2.27.B.

Question 60: Section 48 19 80 Part 2.28.B - Would you prefer that the positive and negative ceiling voltage be tested at the manufacturing factory?

Response 60: Only positive ceiling voltage must be tested at the factory.

Question 61: Concerning Training in Section 01 79 20 – 3.

Section 1.01 A. 1 a. States Includes three multi-session courses (at each power plant) to accommodate government employees who are working on alternate shifts.

Section 3.10 F States Training course content typically including:

1. Day 1 (Session 1): Design Theory - Overview of how the Excitation system interacts and functions in the overall operation of the corresponding hydrogenerator at Keswick power plant and Shasta Power Plant.

a. Fundamentals and design theory of the excitation system.

2. Day 2 (Session 2): Basic Operations and Maintenance of the Excitation System.

3. Day 3 (Session 3): Detailed Maintenance, Hardware and Software which includes, but is not limited to relay protection, systems control, monitoring, calibrations and programming

Does this mean that we should quote SIX three day courses? Would each of those be separate site visits?

Response 61: See revised Section 01 79 20.

Question 62: At the Shasta Powerplant there is a wall that will need to be demolished to remove the existing PPTs, and install the new PPTs for U3-U5. Could you please advise us what the wall is made of. Ie: Is it made of asbestos, metal or other non-hazardous material?

Response 62: The wall sections are made up of metal enclosed asbestos sheeting

Question 63: There is not adequate access to remove or install the new PPTs at Shasta in their current location. The old unit would have to be cut into pieces and it would be impossible to get a new unit into its place. Would the government consider reusing the existing PPTs since the ratings will not change? If not, where would the government like the new units to be installed.

The primary bus for the unit would need to be extended to the new location, which would require new large holes for the bus along the new routing.

Response 63: Modifications to bus are contractor design responsibility. New PPTs will remain in current location. The contractor may not reuse the PPTs. Refer to added

Section 51 00 05 Photographs: Shasta Firewalls.

Question 64: 1.05 Regulatory Requirements

A. Contractor shall be licensed as classification type C-10 by the California Contractors State

License Board (CLSB).

We assume that this clause applies only to the electrical contractor performing the actual removal and installation at site and not to the prime bidder unless the prime bidder is also the installer?

Please confirm.

Response 64: Yes, the C-10 license applies to the electrical contractor performing the actual electrical work. If the prime bidder is performing actual electrical removal and installation, they would also need a C-10 license.

Question 65: Are there any detail drawings available for the pilot exciters on Keswick 1-

3? These would be very helpful in estimating the work required for the poles, collector rings, and brushes/holders.

Response 65: This Amendment includes two additional Keswick drawings: Collector

Lead - Dwg. No. P-6999537 (Sheet 273) and Collector Connections - Dwg. No. T-

8006496 (Sheet 272).

Question 66: Can the contractor use elevators at the power plants?

Response 66: The contractor may use the elevators at the power plants for personnel and small tools, but not as a service elevator for large equipment. Refer to Spec Section 01 31

19 Part 1, 1.04.A.4 Crane Use Coordination Meeting for discussions on using

Government cranes for moving large equipment.

Solicitation No. R17PS00307 Specifications No. 20-C0863

B-1

CONTINUATION OF

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

Shasta and Keswick Power Plant Excitation System Replacement

Mid-Pacific Region-Shasta and Keswick Power Plants

Central Valley Project - California

B.1 PRICE SCHEDULES

(a) The contractor shall, except as otherwise noted, provide all necessary labor, equipment, materials, supplies, transportation, travel, and per diem necessary to perform the work specified in the attached Statement of Work.

(b) Offers will be considered for award on the following Price Schedule, but no offer will be considered for award on only a part of the Price Schedule.

(c) All offers are subject to the terms and conditions of this solicitation.

(d) Definitions:

(1) CLIN – Contract Line Item Number

PRICE SCHEDULE

CLIN Section Supplies or Services Quantity and Unit

Unit

Price

Amount

1) WBR

1452.232-81

Mobilization and

Preparatory Work

For the lump sum of $

2) 26 05 02 Basic Electrical

Materials and Methods

For the lump sum of $

2) 26 05 10

26 05 33

26 05 38

Conductors and Cable, Electrical Conduit, and Terminal Boxes

For the lump sum of $

3) 26 25 10 Metal-Enclosed Bus For the lump sum of $

4) 48 19 80 Excitation Systems For the lump sum of $

5) 48 19 80 Power Potential

Transformers (PPT)

For the lump sum of $

Amendment No. 0005

B-2

PRICE SCHEDULE

CLIN Section Supplies or Services Quantity and Unit

Unit

Price

Amount

6) 26 25 13 Removing and

Modifying Existing

Equipment

For the lump sum of $

7) 48 19 80 Spare Parts For the lump sum of $

8) 26 05 36 Removable Cable Trays For the lump sum of $

9) 26 05 10 CREDIT, Salvage for

Copper in Removed

Control Cables and

Conductors and Medium

Voltage Cables

For the lump sum of $

10) 01 78 30 Project Record

Documents

For the lump sum of $

TOTAL FOR PRICE SCHEDULE $_________________

M-1

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

WBR 1452.225-82 NOTICE OF WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION MAY 2005

GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT

EVALUATIONS -- BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

In accordance with the Agreement on Government Procurement, as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act

(Pub. L. 103-465), and other trade agreements, FAR Subpart 25.4, World Trade Organization Government

Procurement Agreement, applies to Bureau of Reclamation acquisitions. In order to apply trade agreements unique to

Reclamation, the contracting officer will (irrespective of any other provision or clause of this solicitation) evaluate acquisitions at or above the dollar thresholds listed in FAR 25.402(b) without regard to the restrictions of the Buy

American Act.

WBR 1452.215-88 Evaluation Factors for Award – MAY 2005

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable

Source Selection Process

(a) Award will be made to the responsible offeror submitting the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost/price factors and any significant subfactors listed in this provision.

(b) Proposals shall be evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked, using the non-cost/price factors listed below. There shall be no trade-offs. Past performance shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305; however there shall be no comparative assessment of offerors' past performance. If the Contracting Officer determines that a small business' past performance is not acceptable, the matter shall be referred to the Small Business Administration for a Certificate of Competency determination, in accordance with the procedures contained in FAR Subpart 19.6 and 15 U.S.C.

637(b)(7). If a proposal is determined by the Contracting Officer to be "technically unacceptable" as a result of evaluating all factors other than cost or price, the proposal may be rejected from further consideration. Since technical proposals are being solicited to obtain information to be used in the evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use information outside of the proposal to evaluate the capability of offerors and the value of offers.

(c) Pursuant to FAR 15.305, a cost or price evaluation may be performed to determine the reasonableness of costs/prices proposed and the offeror's understanding of, and ability to perform, the prospective contract.

(d) The following factors, significant subfactors (if listed), and acceptability standards for non-cost/price factors/subfactors shall be considered in evaluating proposals and making the source selection:

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

1) The Government will evaluate contractor’s technical proposal for Experience for projects similar in scope (see

Specification Section 01 11 00 1.02 for Principal Components of Work), complexity, and magnitude to the work required under this solicitation.

2) The Government will utilize information gained from contact references and may utilize information from

M-2 sources not provided by the Offeror.

3) The Government will only evaluate key personnel from other than the Offeror when a Letter of Commitment is provided.

4) The Government will evaluate the involvement of each key personnel for this project.

5) The Government will evaluate the provided list of alternate personnel sources.

Technical Proposal will be rated as shown below:

Rating Definition

Acceptable Offeror, or their proposed subcontractor (requires letter of commitment) and key project and site personnel are available, committed and have substantiated experience with construction of work similar in nature to the work requirements contained within the solicitation.

Unacceptable Offeror does not have the required specialized experience

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

It is considered important to the Government that the Offeror, and their subcontractors have acceptable past performance with construction of work similar in nature to the requirements contained within this solicitation.

The Government will evaluate information provided and the received Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) from references for work on projects of similar scope, complexity and magnitude to the work required under this solicitation.

In addition, the Government will evaluate information provided by the Past Performance Information Retrieval

System (PPIRS).

Subcontractor past performance will also be evaluated when Letter(s) of Commitment are provided.

Past Performance will be rated as shown below:

Rating Definition

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance is unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the effort.

Neutral Offeror has no record of relevant past performance or past performance is not available.

The Government will view an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance for whom past performance is not available with a neutral rating.

FACTOR 3 – SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

It is considered important to the Government that the offeror provide an acceptable Subcontracting Plan as required by FAR 19.702 (a)(1) and in accordance with FAR 19.704 as mentioned under WBR 1452.215-82 included in

Section L.

M-3

The Government will evaluate the offerors documentation provided to substantiate acceptable past performance under previous contacts in meeting required small business subcontracting metrics (IAW FAR 15.304(c)(3)(ii) on projects of similar scope, complexity and magnitude to the work required under this solicitation.

Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be rated as shown below:

Rating Definition

Acceptable Offeror demonstrates satisfactory past performance in utilizing SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB firms. An example of satisfactory performance is that the offeror met previously established subcontracting goals. The offeror proposes positive efforts and commitments to subcontract with SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB firms.

Or, if applicable, the offeror provides a fully substantiated explanation as to why it will not subcontract to SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB firms. The proposal may have some minor weaknesses.

Unacceptable Offeror has unsatisfactory past performance in utilizing SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB firms. An example of unsatisfactory performance is that the contractor failed to meet established goals and provided no explanation for the failure. The proposed plan does not include efforts and commitments in subcontracting to SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB firms. And, the offertory's explanation as to why it will not subcontract to SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB firms is not substantiated.

FACTOR 4– COST/PRICE

The award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. The price proposals will be evaluated against the Government Price

Estimate, as well as other price proposals received. The estimate will be used as a benchmark for which the price evaluation will be conducted. The analysis of the variance between the Government's estimate and each offer and variance among the offerors will indicate whether further review is necessary in order to determine if the price is fair and reasonable.

All proposed prices will be reviewed for price reasonableness and any instances of unbalanced pricing.

(End of provision)