THIRD AMENDMENT ISSUED AND NUMBERED AS 0005 W912P621B0005 FB FAC SVCS.pdf

W81G6603364573

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

REFERENCE INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. W912P621B0005, "DISPERSAL BARRIER FACIITIES OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ROMEOVILLE, WILL COUNTY, ILLINOIS"

A. The Bid Opening Date and Time is unchanged by this Amendment, therefore, Bids are due prior to 1:00 p.m. (Central Time) on January 29, 2021. -For details regarding bid submission, please refer to Solicitation Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Bidders.

- AMENDMENT CONTINUES ON NEXT PAGES -

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 51

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 26-Jan-2021

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912P621B0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

13-Jan-2021

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

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 Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer 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 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 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: (Specify authority) 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 THE AUTHORITY OF 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 this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

26-Jan-2021

CODE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, CHICAGO

231 SOUTH LASALLE STREET SUITE 1500

CHICAGO IL 60604-1437

W912P6 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912P621B0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

B. AMENDED SECTION C OF THE SOLICITATION DOCUMENT: A Revised Scope of Work is enclosed hereunder and replaces the previously furnished Scope of Work (Revised) via Amendment 0003.

C. CONTRACTOR’S INQUIRIES: By this Amendment, the Chicago District, USACE responds to Contractor’s inquiries as follows. –PLEASE NOTE: The USACE's responses are provided in bold, black text and follows the Contractors inquiries.

Also note, the numbers shown at the beginning of the Contractor’s questions are in sync with the numbered paragraphs delineated under the Scope of Work.

1.1

After reading the solicitation would like to confirm there will not be any work inside the pulser rooms, large power supply rooms, or large capacitor bank rooms. Other than the crane certification during the government’s annual shutdowns. This is strictly low voltage work being performed under this contract. Downtime is not important, but price is.?

Does the government expect pricing for monitoring the entire facility on site by one person per 8 hour shift 3 shifts per 24 hour period 365 days per year?

Maintenance work to be performed is identified in paragraph 3.20; the overhead cranes are located in the pulser rooms which are accessible during annual maintenance. Downtime for annual maintenance is approximate and identified in paragraph 1.2.4. Work days and hours typically allowed for scheduled maintenance or any on site work is defined in paragraph 3.16.1. The duties for one stationary engineer are described in paragraph 3.13.2

1.1.1.1

Please provide a copy of stray voltage reports. Also, if the government knows what equipment was used to take the measurements please provide manufacturer make and model so the contractor can recreate the testing method to validate site conditions if work is awarded.

Paragraph 3.2.2.4 identifies that there is stray voltage at the facility. Upon contract award, additional information related to the facility can be requested through the COR.

1.2.1

Please confirm that USACE and BNSF will keep this access point open for the on-site effort that is proposed under this solicitation. Please confirm that USACE has been able to take care of all outstanding problems that their systems have created for the railroad crossing. Please confirm that New barrier and Demo barrier not being synchronized with 2A and 2B does not impact this crossing.

The site access point is open and shall remain open for the on-site efforts under this solicitation. See drawings.

1.2.2

Please confirm that scope of work is for inspection of building and snow removal from the west side only. Please confirm that weed, road, fence line, turtle gates will all be handled by the government and is not a scope of service for this contract.

Snow plowing for the site access and parking lot are described in paragraph 3.20.3.3. States that this work is for “…east bank access road and the parking lot south of PB1.” Snow removal duties are identified in paragraph 3.13.3 sub-paragraph 7. and states “…to keep access/inspection routes and entrances to buildings clear during snow events.” Please refer to the scope of work to determine features that are maintained by the contractor; specifically paragraph 3.20.

1.2.3 Reference to paragraph above is to incorporate the paragraph found in 1.1 correct.

See updated SOW

Please confirm that all materials required for performance of maintenance on 1.1 and 1.2,3 major assets will be maintained under this contract and should be included in the price. Including the stadium lighting, CCTV, and Fiberglass railing.

Maintenance required is specified in paragraph 3.20

Are all cameras on-line and working currently? Have fiberglass rails been maintained? With the manufacturer recommending the fiberglass be protected from UV maintenance is needed on all fiberglass railings, fencing and grates is this expected to be performed under this contract? And would that be all fiberglass that is currently on site?

With the railing at the canal wall has this been tested since it has been installed? The railing being a safety railing to keep personnel from falling into an electrified canal would be important to keep someone from potentially ending up in the electrified canal if one was to trip, slip or fall in close proximity to the canal railing. Maintenance and railing test are important to maintaining a safe worksite for any on-site personnel and visitors.

See paragraph 3.18.2.6

Are the parasitic in good working condition? Please confirm that all components are not currently damaged. Does USACE have a recent Dive scans that show the parasitic? What type of testing has been done to verify the system is in good working order and what date and year was the last test completed? Does the government anticipate any dive operations be required under this contract to repair in water structures? Or inspections? When did the government perform the last inspection of all underwater components to confirm all in good working order?

Please refer to the scope of work to determine features that are maintained by the contractor; specifically paragraph 3.20.

1.2.4

Please confirm that no annual maintenance activities are to be priced for this contract. Please confirm that USACE will be taking over the annual maintenance activities. Please advise whether or not Quarterly maintenance, as suggested by manufacturer, is still being performed by USACE or another entity. Is USACE skipping the suggested Quarterly maintenance and only performing maintenance on annual bases now?

Please refer to the scope of work to determine features that are maintained by the contractor; specifically paragraph 3.20. Refer to paragraph 1.2.4 about access to certain areas of the facility during the annual maintenance performed by government.

2.

US Army Corps of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual, EM 385-1-1 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70: National Electrical Code National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70E: Electrical Safety in the Workplace 29 C.F.R. 1910, Occupational Health and Safety Standards

Which version of each is USACE currently observing and expecting the work to be performed under?

Reference paragraph 3.2

3.1

How will the government handle areas on site that do not and may not be able to meet the standards laid out in the OSHA standards. Such as 2A PQ building and specifically maintaining safe clearance. Also, when taking infrared scans are their window ports provided on all equipment that USACE is requesting to be scanned? If not will USACE be installing them prior to the start of this contract? If not, when will this work be completed assuming the government is planning on installing the windows where necessary to facilitate a safe working environment for personnel while performing this work for the government at this facility?

How is the government defining service, tools, meters, parts, materials, supplies, equipment? Including a work van fully supplied with tools. It appears that the contractor needs to include everything in their price to support the site being a 24/7/365-366 site. Is the site still being viewed as mission critical or has the government downgraded its importance?

Please confirm that no annual or quarterly maintenance supplies are to be included in this proposal?

Regarding data and equipment, the scope refers to many components in the system and it is not clear whether it is the government’s intention for the contractor to supply large pieces of equipment such as IGBTs Capacitors, Power Supplies etc. in the proposal or not. Please advise.

For safety deficiencies or meeting OSHA standards please refer to paragraphs 3.19.4 and 3.2.1.5 sub paragraph 7.

For IR scans please refer to drawings for equipment on the site. PPE and safety requirements for performing IR scans will be part of the contractor’s APP upon award.

Annual maintenance and other maintenance supplies are required for supporting the stationary engineer duties and maintenance features described in paragraph 3.20.

3.2

Is this possible when working inside the USACE design built 2A PQ building. With USACE Arc Flash Report for the facility has it been updated since all of the onsite upgrades and does USACE believe that all work can be done in a safe manner and provide the contractor access to do work completely and safely as requested in the referenced documents? Please confirm that the USACE safety team has performed a site visit and confirmed that the systems are able to meet the requirements found in the EM 385-1, OSHA, NFPA 70 and NFPA-70E.

Upon award the project manager shall coordinate with the COR for any applicable facility information required for facility arc flash safety.

3.2.2.3 Is this a government led safety brief? How long will a brief be generally and will everyone that will be performing work be expected to attend or is this for supervisors only? Should we be pricing an hour per person including every person that will be on-site? Will this be just one meeting per activity or is it possible that if a staggered work effort is scheduled the government would provide safety briefing for each new arrival?

This paragraph is a sub paragraph of the contractor’s APP. Therefore the contractor shall insure that their contractor’s working on site shall meet the requirements of this subparagraph.

3.2.2.4

How is the monitoring performed and what exactly does continuous monitoring mean to the government? Is the grounding confirmed to be in good working order through-out the site? What is the impact to the grounding system with all barriers running at full capacity?

Are there any validation reports that are showing the testing of the entire grounding system, with all barriers running? Who performed the testing? What equipment was used and how is the testing validated to be accurate?

Please shared the reports for the contractor to understand what hazards are present for the team members.

Paragraph 3.2.2.4 identifies that there is stray voltage at the facility. Upon award, coordination with the COR will be necessary to obtain additional information related to stray voltage.

3.2.5

What are we recording in the exposure report? What dangers is the government looking to record exposure hours for? Regarding the danger that the government is concerned about, does it have a recommended limit? And what is the limit for personnel that are on site around the equipment and site?

Does the government have any reports that can be shared to understand what the site hazards are that the government is aware of? Shock hazards, EMF exposure, Arc Flash, levels for all systems? Please provide all such site hazard reports generated to date.

Please refer to amended paragraph. Specific requirements are detailed in FAR Clause 52.204-14

Paragraph 3.2.2.4 identifies that there is stray voltage at the facility. Upon award, coordination with the COR will be necessary to obtain additional site information.

3.2.6.1

How does the government want this priced with respect to personnel not designated to be working during the shift?

Weekly safety meetings to be attended by all Contractor employees. COR to be notified 7 days in advance of all safety meetings.

See updated SOW paragraph 3.2.6.1

3.2.6.2

Daily safety meetings for all employees involved with maintenance or repair activities. COR to be notified at least 1 day in advance.

Not sure what the question is. 3.2.6.2 requires a daily safety meeting or tool box talk for all employees involved in maintenance activities in paragraph 3.20.

3.2.10

Reviews of safety paperwork are requested to be performed quarterly but paperwork is due monthly. Is this accurate? All AHAs, app, submitted monthly?

Refer to updated paragraph 3.2.10 in the amendment

3.2.11

Do you have some examples of what you are looking for? Please provide some acceptable examples of what you are requesting.

Refer to updated paragraph 3.2.11 in the amendment

3.2.13 What is a formal classroom? Does this need to be in person training? That is attended by all personnel with a live person training happening with contractor and sub-contractors and employees? All physically in one room being taught.

2021 NFPA? for Base Year?

Contractor personnel shall have required training as specified in paragraph 3.2.13. Refer to NFPA standards; specifically 130.2(D)(3) and 110.2(D) for further guidance

3.2.18

Will this be allowed to be stored in the government facility? Or should we plan on storing in the contractor supplied storage facility that will be on site to store other parts needed to support the contract.

Refer to paragraph 3.17.2.3

3.2.19

Please supply a copy of the current standard operating procedure.

Refer to updated paragraph in the most current amendment

3.2.20

What does this mean? Is it expected that we maybe suiting up and escorting a responder into a burning building? Or assisting in an ARC flash, Electrical shock recovery? Does USACE have a written plan for this that can be shared?

Have the USCG, Local First Responders all received training from USACE for their facility? Is the same training available to the contractor, its subcontractors and all assigned employees once the contract kicks off? If so, will it be offered multiple times due to pandemic grouping limitations?

Refer to updated paragraph in the most current amendment.

3.3.2

Will this be required to be performed in Chicago office? Is it only offered in person and how many are allowed at a time for the appointment?

How will reports and emails be handled? Is the government prepared to supply devices for the work or will the contractor be supplied an access point to support contractor owned and supplied equipment?

This can be performed virtually and will be coordinate with COR upon award.

For computer equipment refer to paragraph 3.18.2.6 and 3.18.2.7

3.3.7

Are there any areas on site that are considered sensitive?

Refer to updated paragraph in the most current amendment.

3.3.10

Please confirm that additional cost would be recovered under a change order?

Refer to amendment #003 Inquiry #5 which includes the following language in the response: “Should circumstances arise requiring immediate work, or addressing unforeseen/differing conditions, the government may negotiate a modification with the contractor to obtain fair and reasonable prices under these circumstances; any modifications resulting will formally incorporate the change into the contract and add the settled upon price with matching funds.”

3.9.1

Please advise how a contractor can follow the requirements found in EM-385-1, OSHA, and NFPA 70. NFPA 70E when the government is stating that they will be placing other unrelated contract work and non-contract related contractors and sub-contractors or anyone else that they decide to cycle through a contractor work area. Once work has started, and a 3rd party has entered the space work will need to be repeated to meet the safety requirements that we are being asked to follow. Should we included time for additional 3rd party contractors to be in the same area for all associated work or is the government have in mind what activities they are planning on 3rd party contractors be on site for? Will a third-party contractor have their own escort that would be coordinating with this contract’s escort or would the 3rd party be free to roam on their own? Will all 3rd party contractors be required to hold the safe training certificates as this contract requires prior to entering the shared workspace so as to ensure that they have a minimum competency level when entering the shared work area?

Please reference paragraph 3.9.1; this paragraph allows for the restriction of other third party Contractors from their work area on a case by case basis. The goal is to provide a safe work environment for all parties.

3.9.2

Whom does the government expect to attend the weekly meetings?

The project manager and any other designated employees. Please refer to paragraph 3.12.3 which allows the project manager, quality control and site safety health officer to be performed by one or several designated employees.

3.9.4

If the barrier is going to be operated above the manufacturer’s max operating range will the government provide notice to the contractor? What are the max ranges recommended by the manufacturer? Please provide for the record?

Typical operating parameters specific to the pulse generating systems are identified in paragraph 3.10

3.10.1

Please provide a complete copy of operation manuals for Barrier 1.

When is Barrier 1 going to be brought online? Anticipated date for it to start running?

Will there be any additional grounding test to make sure that the personnel do not get shocked? When will additional grounding tests be performed?

Will the telephone pole at 2A be removed before Barrier 1 is running so that another person is not shocked from that? When will the telephone pole at 2A be removed?

O and M manuals will be available upon contract award. Barrier I will be available to operate during the base year of this contract. Please refer to drawings for all existing site features.

3.11.1 It is the government’s intent to pay for repairs and upgrades identified during inspections funded through pre-priced Change Orders? through T&M directives? Or is the assumption that all such potential costs should be included in this proposal response.

See updated paragraph related to question about “pay for repairs”. There is no reference to “upgrades” in this paragraph. See amendment #003 answer to inquiry #5 regarding change orders. There is no reference to T&M directive in this paragraph.

Are repairs reimbursable? How does USACE expect the contractor budget for this if they are not additional?

See updated paragraph related to question about “pay for repairs”. See amendment #003 answer to inquiry #5 regarding change orders. There is no reference to T&M directive in this paragraph.

Is the 13 miles of fence considered part of the fish barrier systems to be maintained under this contract? Are the turtle gates considered parts of the systems to be maintained under this contract? Is the Shed and boat to be included in the maintenance pricing for this contract? Other than the generator on the west bank what else is to be included by the contractor’s pricing for this proposal to the government?

Please reference paragraph 3.20 for specific maintenance activities.

3.12.1

Is this about the current operating engineers? Is it the government’s intention to keep the current on-site operators on site to perform their daily duties being performed to run the facility? The government does not have any technical requirements for the contractor to grade a contractor’s ability against. With this being a price-based solicitation, it is very likely that the government will not be receiving the same team as it is requesting here. Is that the government’s intention? What will the government be comparing to when they are reviewing a replacement or substitute for personnel that have currently been involved on site. How should we price this? Will we assume that the same personnel currently involved will continue to be involved? This language seems problematic for the government.

Stating they want the same team, yet the contractor bidding cannot guarantee that is possible and price efficiently. If the government is ready for the warm body approach on a 24/7/365 facility to meet the cheapest price possible for the contract bringing the same team back may not be possible. With this being strictly price driven it’s not clear where the government is looking to improve efficiency in the pricing. Please advise.

Please refer to the experience requirement throughout the scope of work for the project manager, site safety officer and quality control personnel. Stationary Engineers experience is specified in paragraph 3.13.1 and required to be submitted for approval.

3.12.2.1

Contractor will be available 24/7/365/366 for the COR? Please advise whether the price/cost for the availability is to be included in the proposal price or that USACE intends to pay for that availability via pre-priced Change Order or T&M directive as needed. A minimum will be allowed when COR engages the Contractor? The government wants a reduced team over the weekends while the government is not on sites. Is this accurate? This is true of holidays also.

Scale down for the holidays. COR will engage the team if needed?

No where in the contract does it state that the project manager shall be on site. See amended paragraph 3.12.2.1.

3.12.3

Please confirm it is the government’s intention that this is a separate person from the person or persons performing the work? Please confirm that this will be in addition to the on site operator that you are calling out for monitoring so there will be two people minimum onsite at all times for this contract. Please confirm that, at a minimum we are to have an operating engineer and QC person onsite full time to perform the monitoring as described in this section.

Paragraph 3.12.3 states “The QC person shall be responsible for overseeing the safety and quality control programs for the 24/7 monitoring and troubleshooting of the barriers and the performance of all maintenance and/or repair work for the barriers.” The key words being ‘overseeing the programs’.

Paragraph 3.12.3 also states “The QC shall be required to be physically on-site during the performance of all scheduled maintenance activities defined in this scope of work.” Maintenance activities are defined in paragraph 3.20.

3.13

Please confirm that all work for Stationary Engineer will be on East Bank Only. Please confirm Stationary Engineer will not be expected to go to West Bank for any of their daily duties. Please confirm that the West Bank information provided is for background information to facilitate bidder’s understanding of the facility’s overall size but not to include the West Bank in the scope of services provided under this contract.

West bank information is provided for background information on facility and for identifying access to Kohler generator.

Please reconfirm that the Government is asking for only one operator per 8 hour shift and that there are to be 3 8 hour shifts included 365 days per year. Please confirm that there is no expectation to have a separate operator per 8 hour shift per barrier?

The duties for one stationary engineer are described in paragraph 3.13.2

3.13.1.1.1 With the activities that require two personnel being present for safety reason how should this be priced? When resetting breakers in the storm, entering an ARC flash boundary as requested in the scope. It is presumed this would be an overlap of the shifts for inspection of the areas to take readings. However, it’s not clear how one would price the breakers tripping and fuses blowing that may need a spotter present for safety. Does the government want a fixed number of two person events priced per day? week? or Month? If so, how many? If not, how would the government suggest these two person events be priced by the bidders?

Contractor’s APP shall identify hazards and applicable AHA’s for performing any on-site work.

Is it the government’s intent to have Stationary Engineers perform maintenance and repairs on the systems? If so, is the government in support of adding an additional person to the effort to allow for work to happen as the any incident happens in real time? Due to the nature of the site and the hazards that come with it the government would not expect a person that is on site by themselves to perform work that should only be done when a spotter is available. In emergency situations will Government personal be available to be on site and assisting with helping the system recover and at a minimum be available to be a safety spotter or should we price in the proposal safety spotters for supporting emergency work? The government is not asking for the on-site operators to perform work that would not be able to be done safely as a single operator while working on a very unique system? Is it reasonable to wait until the government returns to work the following day to reset breakers or provide oversight for the onsite operator while, they swap parts or troubleshoot the system to determine if additional services need to be provided outside of their ability?

Paragraph 3.13.2 and 3.13.3 describes the duties of the one stationary engineer. Abilities are defined in paragraph 3.13.1

When the government says advanced facilities like the fish barrier please provide an example of an advanced facility with operators that work on systems such as the fish barrier? Will need to know what an acceptable equivalent is for this facility when trying to meet the operator requirements? A couple of examples would be helpful.

Refer to drawings to determine the types of systems being monitored.

What would an acceptable equivalent be? Does the Chicago District have acceptable equivalent in any of their other facilities that you have accepted currently? If the personnel meet the 25070 Stationary Engineer description and operate similar to the Chicago Stationary Engineers meaning they have the ability to perform the work within the talent pool not necessarily each person being able to perform the task independently. Is this an accurate understanding of what is being requested being priced here? Who is the approving authority for the alternate and we are assuming the alternate would be approved prior to the award not something the government would want to have to negotiate after award? If the current engineers are not going to be priced. Can you confirm that the current team meets the requirements you have laid out here in the Stationary Engineer Section or are some operating with exceptions?

Paragraph 3.13.2 and 3.13.3 describes the duties of the stationary engineer. Abilities are defined in paragraph 3.13.1

Operators will be expected to implement and assign the maintenance for the systems? Does the government have a system that will be used by the operator to document the repairs and maintenance that the operator will be expected to use to help build a data base for the site to start to forecast lifespan of components found withing the facility?

What program will the government be requiring the operator to use? Training will need to be priced into the contractor’s proposal. Will the operator be responsible for implementing the program or is it already established on site? If it is already on site are all systems currently being tracked in the program? Is it the government’s intent for the onsite operator to be responsible for maintaining the records or will the government personnel be handling the tracking?

I am unsure of this question or which part of the scope of work identifies implementation and assignment of the maintenance for the systems. Maintenance specific activities and requirements are identified in paragraph 3.20.

3.12.1.2

Is this one operator per shift, per barrier?

Paragraph 3.13.2 and 3.13.3 describes the duties of the one stationary engineer. Abilities are defined in paragraph 3.13.1

3.13.1.1.4

Troubleshooting, diagnosing, repair, modify or install? To what level are we asking the operator to be able to perform? Are you requesting an operator be able to troubleshoot a circuit board? Or looking for an operator that can do basic high-level trouble shooting and diagnose, repair?

Is this 1 operator, per shift, per barrier?

Paragraph 3.13.2 and 3.13.3 describes the duties of the one stationary engineer. Abilities are defined in paragraph 3.13.1. See updated scope of work in this amendment.

3.12.1.1.5

At operator level only? It is stated that the operator will be able to turn off and on the system. This is an operator level action. Does this addition in the section serve to indicate that the government is looking for bidders to price more than operator level functions?

Assuming this in reference to paragraph 3.13.1.1.5. But I do not see the reference to “turn off and on the system”. Apologize but I do not understand the question.

Paragraph 3.13.1.12 does require the ability to utilize computer software systems to operate the barrier systems

3.13.1.1.6

To what level? This will impact what diagnostic equipment and skill level the operator will need to support the government’s apparent intentions.

Refer to updated SOW

3.13.1.1.7

The onsite operator will need to know current electrical codes. Is the government expecting the operator to work at the same level as an electrician when supporting the contract?

Refer to updated SOW

3.13.1.1.8

Does the facility have a machine shop that will be available for the operator to perform the fabrication or will this be something we should include in the onsite storage facility that will be provided by the contractor to store required materials in? Will the repairs and fabrication include building circuit boards? Fabricating parts (if required) is placed in the scope but it’s not clear what the government is looking for the operator’s ability to be here. Please provide some examples of what type of parts the government is asking the operator to be able to fabricate so we can confirm that the operator has the ability to perform the work being expected?

Refer to updated SOW

3.13.1.1.10

Properly documented plans are critical to being able to safely troubleshoot a system. The facility and government will need to provide accurate clearly readable schematic at the very least for their facility to allow a competent person to understand the inherent dangers in the systems. Is the government in the process of updating their drawings to include all new systems and when will the drawing be available?

Refer to updated SOW. O and M manuals will be available upon contract award.

3.13.1.1.11

At what level is the government looking for support with as-builts? Does the operator need drafting skills to support the government wish with what they have stated here? Please give some examples of what the government is requesting of the operator here. Sketches on a napkin handed over to the government staff to be drafted up, red lines to the existing drawings? Are you looking for the operator to have enough experience to proofread the government’s engineering staff for accuracy?

Refer to updated SOW

3.13.1.1.12

Operators are being asked to perform electrical work. Please provide examples of what type of electrical work the operator is expected to do under this contract. In order to understand the government’s, wish it’s important to understand the governments expectations for the crew. Please provide examples of Electrical work that they will be expected. Also need to understand what electrical work is expected to supply appropriate personnel and safety gear for the effort.

At what level. Will the operator be required to load firmware on all equipment? Please provide examples of what the government is looking for here so we can provide a properly trained operator for the site.

Refer to updated SOW for types of systems that the operator will troubleshoot and monitor.

3.13.1.1.14

Does the site have approved tie off points for fall protection while using ladders? Or will lifts be possible in all areas that the government will require work to be performed?

Is it the government’s intent to abuse the operators for months on end through packing 5-gallon water jugs to fill a system that has been reported to have a leak and the government has ignored fixing for a year and a half now? Will the government be expecting the operators to take over the refilling of the leaking system at 2A?

Refer to updated SOW for the operator’s abilities and duties. Any use of the on site ladders or fall protections systems will be addressed in the contractor’s APP.

Contractor’s APP shall include AHA’s for all site activities.

Not sure if this is a question or a statement. AHA’s are part of the APP.

3.13.1.2

Do all critical alarms make it to the control room? Are there any alarms that do not make it to the control room that are alarms to critical systems that could present an injury or possibly kill an operator because they were not provided a warning prior to making their rounds? Please provide some examples of items that do not have alarms provided in the control room. Also confirm that there are alarms local to the equipment that would alarm the operator to proceed with caution if they were to encounter during their hourly rounds.

Refer to paragraph 3.13.2 sub paragraph 10.

Is this system running? If not, when is it expected to be coming online? What are the operating parameters expected to be?

Refer to SOW paragraph 3.10

What is the Max operating output of the barrier? Is the system throttled? Meaning does it have safety devices in place to prevent it from running above the manufacturer recommended suggested max or does it have the ability to overrun the stated operating parameters? Could the operator take the system above the max operating parameter that the manufacturer is recommending being the top end of where the system should be run at?

Refer to SOW paragraph 3.10

What impact does the New Barrier have to the site when running at the manufacturer’s recommended max output?

Facility reports will be provided upon award of the contract in coordination with the COR

Is Barrier 1 running currently? If not, will it be running soon?

Refer to paragraph 3.10

Only one pulser in this building?

Barrier I pulser will be operational in the base period; see paragraph 3.10

When will second pulser be installed?

Not applicable to this contract

When will second pulser be running?

Not applicable to this contract

Is there enough clearance in this building to safely enter for a walk through without being completely suited up in an approved ARC flash suit with a spotter available to oversee the operators walk through? The 1st and last inspection of each shift could be overlapped at the shift change but the walk through in the middle of the shift would be more difficult to have coverage for a spotter to be available to support the operator if something went wrong during the walk through? Additionally, can you confirm that the equipment has been replaced since the last overheating was observed? The equipment has overheated on multiple occasions now and with the overheating comes a shortened life expectancy. Has the building cooling system been upgraded to prevent additional damage from happening? Has the equipment been re-certified by the installer and manufacture to be in good working order? Any safety concerns that we should take into consideration?

Site AHA’s and APP will address site safety

Does this building have appropriate clearances available to safely walk through without additional PPE being worn by the operator?

Refer to drawings for site clearances and facility systems

Is there adequate space for inspection to be completed by one operator safely in each generator? Any hazards in any of the generators we should be aware of? Is all maintenance up to date on the generators including switches and breakers? Please provided records of maintenance and testing.

Refer to drawings for site clearances and facility systems

Is refilling of a discharged tank on the contractor to do list? Should this be included in the proposal? Will the government expect the contractor to refill the tanks if one discharges at the site without a fire being present?

Refer to drawings for site clearances and facility systems. Refer to paragraph 3.20 for maintenance requirements. Refer to government furnished items regarding fire alarm systems.

Have all previously recorded leaks been fixed? Are all buildings all dry inside during heavy rain and storm events or are there leaks?

Refer to operator duties for identifying and reporting any findings while performing duties.

Other than 2A cooling system leaks are there any other leaks that USACE is currently aware of?

Will operator be expected to reset breakers? If so, is this all breakers? Breakers trip for a reason? Will the operator be expected to enter pulser rooms to determine if there is a short that led to a breaker tripping?

Refer to operator duties for identifying and reporting any findings while performing duties. Refer to scope of work regarding access to pulser rooms and cabinets.

Resetting a breaker could be fatal in some cases and should only be done when a spotter is present in some cases.

What is the government’s intention and expectation?

Regarding adjusting flow rates, please provide examples of when this may be necessary. Is this currently automated?

See revised SOW

Regarding Government supplied radios, will there be any requirement for upkeep of these Government supplied devices under this contract?

See government furnished items paragraph for item provided and maintained by the government.

On site computers are not to be used for email or Internet however logs are to be e-mailed. Will the government be supplying laptops for this purpose? Or will that be the contractor’s responsibility? Is there a government furnished Internet connection? Or will internet access be the contractor’s responsibility?

See government furnished items paragraph for item provided and maintained by the government.

Is this one operator, per shift, per barrier.

See paragraph describing the duties for one operator

3.13.1.2.1

Please confirm that cleaning machines and supplies are contractor’s responsibility? Regarding requirement for wiping down with anti-bacterial work surfaces and storage areas, please clarify where the work areas are and how many storage areas will be cleaned with disinfectant at end of each shift. Is it the government’s intent to have the stationary engineer do this work?

Please confirm that pest control and cleaning services for the entire site are to be priced under this contract? Please confirm that there will be no other cleaning service being contracted on site for cleaning services. Please confirm there will be no other contracts for exterminator on site.

See updated SOW including government furnished items

Regarding keeping Facilities free of dirt, insects, nests, webs, debris, etc. Facilities include but not limited to the doors, doorways, and entryways; windows; light fixtures; CCTV cameras; interior and exterior windows; man, doors and roll up doors and sidelights and door glass; exterior lighting fixtures; CCTV cameras and building overhangs or awnings. Frequency of treatment shall be adequate to prevent impact to services, will switchgear be expected to be cleaned? If so, can it be turned off while being cleaned? Is this a dusting of the exterior and top or is there an expectation to clean inside as well? Please provide examples of what equipment will be cleaned.

See updated SOW

Cleaning of building interiors and equipment to allow for routine inspection.

See updated SOW

What is considered a routine inspection? Is this the 3 time a shift walks through or something more in depth?

See updated SOW

When reviewing the paragraph titled Flooring, it refers to Rooms numbers, please provide drawings identifying the rooms that are being referenced.

Regarding sweeping and vacuuming floors, please confirm that all vacuums, floor cleaners, mops, cleaning supplies etc are to be supplied by contractor under this contract? What is the smallest area that will be cleaned by a floor cleaner and what is the largest area that will be cleaned with floor cleaner? Will the government move a single cleaner around from building to building for the contractor’s use? If not, will there be a way for the contractor to move machines around onsite from building to building? or should the contractor expect to supply cleaners for each building? With operator and QA personnel this may be possible with the appropriate machinery to transport from one building to the next. Is it the government intention for this effort to be done by the stationary engineer though?

See updated SOW

Regarding requirement that Ice melt is to be supplied by contractor, please advise how much does the government currently use during a normal winter in Chicago when the area receives about 36 inches of snow annually?

See government furnished items paragraph 3.18

Please confirm that boots brushes, entry mats, and walk on/off mats are all to be included by contractor in pricing for this contract.

See government furnished items paragraph 3.18

Contractor will be expected to keep doors and gates closed and locked? Will the government be opening gate to enter for work and closing again behind themselves or will the operator be responsible for the gate opening and closing? Is there a remote for the main gate or is this a manual gate? Is the contractor responsible for the electric gate in this contract when it malfunctions, breaks, fails? How will that be handled?

See government furnish items paragraph 3.18

Is there any outside cleaning of the building other than dusting off lights that is expected of the contractor? Please confirm that no power washing of the exterior buildings is expected under this contract.

See updated SOW

3.14

Enough qualified personnel who are experienced, qualified. Is downtime an issue? When looking at enough qualified personnel we need to understand what the government is requesting from the contractor. Presumably two people would get things done faster than one. which would decrease the downtime of the fish barrier systems possibly. 3 or 4 people would get things done quicker yet presumably. Need to understand what acceptable time down is for the government on a 24/7/365-366 contract? Price is more important than the performance so this could be just one specialized person being quoted. If downtime is not an issue. Please confirm that downtime will not be an issue.

See updated SOW

Licensed? What license is the government referring to here?

See paragraph 3.13.1

Maintaining the equipment will need a person onsite capable of working on a Linux based system for supporting 2A/2B What are normal monitoring, troubleshooting, maintain, and repair activities that would be needed by the government from the contractor. What systems are the Linux based software on and what type of maintenance to you force needing to be performed in the base year and follow-on years? Does this require a programmer versed in writing software that is Linux based programming from scratch? How often is this person generally needed for the barriers? Not sure how to price this based on the narrative provided in the specialized support staff. When is this person used currently? Please provide some examples of what and when this person may be needed.

See updated SOW

Logix500 control systems found at Demo and Barrier 1. Is running standard C code that is easily transferred from the system and the government has a copy of all systems currently in their possession that is proven to work and has some runtime on it confirming its performance. What is the warranty period, and will the contractor be expected to correct any errors in the programing that surface after the system is able to run? Please confirm that the system has been properly vetted by the government and is in good working order with redundant safety systems in place tried and tested to confirm that the systems will protect the onsite personnel. Is there any inherently danger that the contractor needs to be aware of with this new system?

See updated SOW

3.15.2

Preventive maintenance includes.

a. IR Scan

b. Floor cleaning epoxy covered floors.

c. Dust control for main road access

d. Parking lot sealed and striped

e. Snow removal

f. Annual Crane inspection (between December-March)

g. Annual Chiller inspection

h. Annual Generator inspection, maintenance

No other maintenance in the solicitation that will be expected in the contract without a modification being accepted by both parties.

See updated SOW; also refer to amendment #003 inquiry #5

3.16.1

Please provide all documents mentioned in this section including addenda.

See updated SOW

3.17.2.2

Does the government have a grounding plan that they follow that records current condition of the facilities outlets?

As defined by OSHA, NFPA 70E, NFPA 70. The program demonstrates that the building electrical system is grounded properly and demonstrates that the government is maintaining their electrical system.?

Facility reports will be provided upon award of the contract in coordination with the COR

3.17.2.5

Does the government have any reports that can be shared for decibel levels that an employee will be exposed while being on site and the duration the highest recorded decidable level last during a normal shift for the operator. Any areas on site that put an operator in danger when working alone on site after hours or on the weekend, or holidays that the government would be willing to share.

Facility areas requiring hearing protection are designated by signage as appropriate. Any activities require hearing protection by the contractor will be identified in the APP.

3.17.3.1

Use of Green products should be incorporated into the pricing?

Refer to SOW

3.18.1.1

This will be one session and all personnel supporting the contract will be in attendance. When is it anticipated to be happening? How soon after award?

See updated SOW

3.18.2.1 in what building is this located? Will this be used to fill cooling system?

See updated SOW

3.18.2.5 service and maintenance will be quoted, and contract modified to incorporate the filtration system after it is installed. What is the anticipated date for this to be commissioned? What warranties will it come with and how long until the contractor will be taking it over from the government?

See updated SOW; also, systems maintained by contractor are specified in paragraph 3.20

3.18.2.9

Will the government provide maintenance for snow blower?

See paragraph government furnished item 3.18

3.19

Will the contractor be notified and be made aware of unscheduled interruptions? How will we know if there are any interruptions?

See updated SOW

What will be required to be logged? Please provide an example of what information is expected in the log. With each building having differences that are specific to each. please label each example.

See SOW which states “The format of the log shall be developed by the contractor with input from the COR and submitted to the COR for approval”

3.19.1

How will notification be provided?

See updated SOW

If the operator is doing rounds to other sites, he can easily miss one of the barriers dropping out. Is there any kind on notification system?

See updated SOW

3.19.2

Please clarify what this is asking?