Contractor_Questions_18_May_2016.pdf

Date Question Answer 4/28/2016 In relation to SECTION 26 28 00.00 10, 2.8.12 Traffic Control System PLC: Will the contractor be responsible for writing the traffic signal control system final operating program, and the programming of the new Traffic Control System PLC? If not, who is responsible for the programming work of the new system?

The contractor is responsible for writing the traffic signal control system final operating program, and the programming of the new Traffic Control System PLC.

5/10/2016 Is there an old Arc Flash study that would be available to our MCC vendor prior to placing the bid? If not available prior to the bid, does this document even exist, that we could get it after award? The document will be made available once contract is awarded.

5/10/2016 Dwg E6063, Note 2 talks about new feeder cables. I am unclear, Are Oil Pump #1, #2, #3 and Holding pump to be new wire in existing conduit, or existing wires remain in existing conduit?

Oil Pump #1, #2, #3 and Holding pump to be new wire in existing conduit, as shown on dwg E6063.

5/10/2016 The midwall building has a cathead beam hook that is depicted on reference drawing O‐LRI‐70/3.1 & 70/4.2. During the pre‐bid meeting it was stated by USACE personnel that they had envisioned the contractor using this cat head beam hook for setting up a come‐along to hoist the MCC section onto the building’s second floor. Can you please confirm this is an acceptable plan. Can the USACE provide the rated capacity of this hook? If the USACE is unable to provide this, would a structural analysis need to be performed by the prime contractor in order prove the load capacity of the hook is sufficient to hold the load of the MCC prior to using the cat head beam hook?

If the prime contractor wishes to use the cathead beam hook, a structural analysis would need to be performed by the prime contractor, and reviewed and approved by USACE, in order to prove the load capacity of the hook is sufficient to hold the load of the MCC prior to using the cat head beam hook.

5/10/2016 The specifications dictate that the prime contractor is to have a CCQ System Manager and Site Safety and Health Officer on site for each day contract work is performed (01 45 01 para 3.4.2 and 01 35 26 para 1.5.1.1). Paragraph 1.5.1.1.1 states that the site superintendent may not be the CQC Manager or the Site Safety and Health Officer. Can this restriction be waived given the size and scope of the job? Can one person be designated the CQC Manager, SSHO and Site Superintendent?

The requested waiver will be dependent upon the qualifications of the proposed individual.

5/10/2016 Paragraph 3.4.3 of section 01 45 01 states, The contractor shall provide an electrical specialized personnel to assist the CQC system manager who will “be physically present at the construction site during work on their areas of responsibility…” Can you please clarify what the areas of responsibility are that would require this additional electrical engineer? The majority of the project is electrical in nature. Would the electrical QC person be required for all electrical work, or for all testing and cutover work? Would it be acceptable to have this person make weekly inspections of the progress of work? Lastly, if the CQC System Manager’s experience and credentials qualify, could the System Manager fulfill this role in addition to that of the CQC System Manager?

The electrical QC would be required to be present during all phases of the electrical work. No, it would not be acceptable to have the electrical QC only perform weekly inspections. Yes, if the CQC System Manager has the experience & credentials, they could fulfill this role too.

5/11/2016 There are two traffic signal control systems‐Land Chamber and River Chamber. Can both be run by a common PLC (in lieu of a dedicated PLC to each control system)? Each chamber control system must have a dedicated PLC, per drawings.

5/11/2016 There is an old concealed spline ceiling system with 12”X12” tiles above the lay‐in ceiling. Some of the tiles may have to be removed to allow the power cables to be transferred from the old MCC to the new MCC. Will the tiles require hazmat removal (typically asbestos was used in this vintage).

USACE is unaware of any Asbestos.

5/12/2016 Since we will need to cut and dispose of the existing MCC or at a minimum, unbolt it, is USACE aware of any of the existing electrical equipment including, but not limited to, the MW‐MCC, conduit, conduit fittings, junction boxes being contaminated with lead paint? USACE is unaware of any lead paint.

5/12/2016 Since we will need to cut and dispose of the existing MCC or at a minimum, unbolt it: 1) is USACE aware of any of the existing electrical equipment including, but not limited to, the MW‐MCC, conduit, conduit fittings, junction boxes being contaminated with lead? and 2) is USACE aware of any Asbestos Insulation on any existing cables connected to the existing MCC‐MW or existing electrical equipment? USACE is unaware of any lead paint or Asbestos.

5/12/2016 General Note 5 on Drawing E‐6063: The contractor shall conduct a ground resistance test to ensure MCC ground is in compliance with NEC. The feed to the 400A main circuit breaker of the existing and proposed new MCC‐MW is fed from an existing 400A circuit breaker (LW‐MCC) located in the landwall Service Building Electrical Room (See Drawing E‐7001). Please clarify the sting requirements detailed in Note 5.

Oil Pump #1, #2, #3 and Holding pump to be new wire in existing conduit. All others are existing.

5/12/2016 General Note 5 on Drawing E‐6063: Will the contractor be required to test the existing Pike Island Service Entrance ground provision or grid at the Landwall Building? If so, a total faculty outage may be required to disconnect the existing earth ground at the existing service entrance equipment in order to isolate the existing earth grounding to test ground resistence. No

5/12/2016 General Note 5 on Drawing E‐6063: Is the intention to test only the #2 ground conductor between the LW‐MCC and the new MW‐MCC? Yes 5/13/2016 Will bag mixed concrete be acceptable for the curb supporting the new MCC Middle Wall? See Amendment Specification Section 03 30 53 5/13/2016 Will concrete testing be required for the concrete required for the curb? See Amendment Specification Section 03 30 53 5/13/2016 Will the USACOE issue a concrete specification? See Amendment Specification Section 03 30 53 5/13/2016 Will any form of surface preparation of the existing floor or doweling be required to install the new curb? See Amendment Specification Section 03 30 53