ADDENDUM D January 31, 2014

Transcription

1 Finance Department Purchasing Division Dear Proposer: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) Specification No C FOR STREET LIGHTING CONVERSION TO LED PROJECT PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE OPENED AND READ PUBLICLY ADDENDUM D January 31, 2014 Clarifications and Questions received from proposers along with answers are attached. No additional questions will be received or answered. If an issue has not been clarified or answered then include the issue and your assumptions in the write up to be submitted on the date below. If your proposal is selected to make a presentation issues and assumptions can be clarified but proposals cannot be altered after submission. The City will be looking for the proposal that best satisfies this RFP. Proposals/bids must be received no later than 2:00 pm, on Thursday, February 13, All responses must be in a sealed envelope and have Street Lighting Conversion to LED Project and Specification No C clearly marked on the outer most mailing envelope. Mail or Hand Deliver To: City of Berkeley Finance Department/General Services Division 2180 Milvia Street, 3rd Floor Berkeley, CA Proposals/bids will not be accepted after the date and time stated above. Incomplete bids that do not conform to the requirements specified herein will not be considered. Thank you for your interest in working with the City of Berkeley for this service. We look forward to receiving your response. Sincerely, Henry Oyekanmi General Services Manager 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA Tel: TDD: Fax: finance@ci.berkeley.ca.us Website:

2 Addendum A Clarifications, Questions and Answers for Specification No C Item III.2.4, Scope of Service, Project Planning, Photometric Analysis Street Lights shall be designed and analyzed in accordance with IESNA RP-08 (Latest Version). Luminance Criteria and appropriate field measurements for straight roadway areas can be found in IESNA Publication LM-50-99, Photometric Measurements of Roadway Lighting Installations (Also found in Appendix A, Calculations and Measurement Parameters, Figure A4). Walkways and Bikeways shall be designed and analyzed in accordance with DG-5-94, Recommended Lighting for Walkways and Class 1 Bikeways. Table for Walkways and Bikeways has been added to new Attachment N General Specifications LED Luminaires. Table for illuminance for intersections has also been added to Attachment N General Specifications LED Luminaires. New Attachment O Photometric Parameters for 15 Representative Locations, has been added. Attachment O provides the following parameters at each site: (1) Face of curb to face of curb dimensions; (2) number of drive lanes between curb to curb dimension; (3) Dimensional information of median (if any); (4) Existing pole layout scenario Single side, opposite or staggered; (5) Existing spacing between poles (on same side); (6) pole setback from face of curb; (7) Existing pole heights; (8) Existing Luminaire arm lengths; (9) Existing wattage and light source; (10) Existing lamp initial rated lumen package; (11) Existing distribution (refractor or flat glass as well as IES roadway type) (12) IES file number for simulation of existing; (13) Total LLF to be in the analysis for both existing HPS or MH simulation; (14) Roadway pavement R table per IES RP-8 to be used in luminance calculation. Revised Attachment I Bid Sheet The City is providing an excel spreadsheet for proposers to use for calculations of the bid items and financial options. Proposers are to submit both a hardcope of Bid sheet and an electronic copy of the filled out spreadsheet. (1) Bid Item No. 1 Separated 70 watts from 100 watt HPS cobra head luminaires. (2) Bid Item No. 2 Separated 100 watt from 70 watt HPS cobra head luminaires The balance of the bid item numbers are increased by one (i.e. Old Bid Item No. 2 is now Bid Item No. 3, Old Bid Item No. 3 is now Bid Item No. 4, etc.) (3) Bid Item No. 3 Combination of 200 watt and 400 watt HPS cobra head luminaires. The City s intent is to replace the 200 watt and 400 watt cobra head luminaires with equivalent 200 watt LED (4) Bid Item No. 4 Represents the existing King Luminaire K118 Washington Acorn post top fixture. The City s original intent was to use conversion kits with these fixtures to save money. However, if the proposers can demonstrate that it would be to the City s advantage fiscally to replace the fixtures with new proposed acorn type fixture Page 2 of 10

3 (Phillips/Lumec Serenade S55-SFOK or acceptable equivalent) include this in the Attachment I Bid sheet and in accompanying write up. (5) Bid Item No. 5 Represents the existing Holophane Washington Series State Street post top fixture. The City s original intent was to use conversion kits with fixtures to save money. However, if the proposers can demonstrate that it would be to the City s advantage fiscally to replace the fixtures with new proposed acorn type fixture (Phillips/Lumec Serenade S55-SFOK or acceptable equivalent) include this in the Attachment I Bid Sheet and in accompanying write up. (6) Bid Item No. 6 Solano Tunnel ceiling fixtures. No change to description. (7) Bid Item No. 7 Represents other post top luminaires. It s the City s intent to replace these existing post top fixtures with (Phillips/Lumec Serenade S55-SFOK or acceptable equivalent). The City is trying to standardize the post top luminaires and it is acceptable to the City to replace fixtures in Bid Items No.s 4 and 5 with same proposed Luminaire as Bid Item No. 7 if it makes fiscal sense. (See Attachment P Existing Post Top Type Fixtures) (8) Bid Item No. 8 Represents other post top luminaires with a second type of post top fixture that is an architectural esthetics type model (Phillips/Lumec Zenith Z40-SFZ4 or acceptable equivalent). (9) Bid Item No. 9 Represents existing gooseneck type fixtures that will remain but need to be converted to LED by conversion kits. (See Attachment Q Existing Gooseneck Fixtures Use Conversion Kits). Revised Attachment N General Specifications LED Luminaires Modified specifications for Max amperage at LED Added Table from DG-5-94 Illumination criteria for walkways and bikeways Added Table for illuminance for intersections New Attachment O Photometric Parameters for 15 Representative Locations New Attachment P Existing Post Top Type Fixtures New Attachment Q Existing Gooseneck Fixture Use Conversion Kits New Attachment R PGE Street Light Inventory Listing The City of Berkeley has received questions from some potential respondents regarding Specification No C, Street Lighting Conversion to LED Project. In an effort to provide the same information to all, listed below are the questions received to date, with responses from City staff. 1. Q. Does the City of Berkeley request a bidders bond for this RFP. If so, can you please refer to the page(s) where the information is listed. 1. A. No, a bidder s bond is not required for this RFP. Page 3 of 10

4 2. Q. The City provided all bidders with a summary of the PG&E streetlight inventory, not the actual PG&E list. We are requesting the City provide at least a sample list of PG&E list showing the existing PG&E data structure and sample records in Excel or PDF Format. This will assist us with better understanding/assessing the level of reconciliation effort and associated risk that will be needed to meet the City s GIS/SPS requirements. 2. A. See New Attachment R- PGE Street Light Inventory Listing 3. Q. Today s LED technology is utilizing drive currents up to 1500ma, and providing a full 10-year warranty. 700ma is restrictive, limiting options we may consider. Would 1000ma be acceptable? 3. A. See Revised Attachment N General Specifications LED Luminaires. Modified Max amperage at LED. 4.Q. The City s luminance specification, when combined with the provided information on street width, pole spacing and pole height, may create a situation where there may be no standard lumen / photometric package that would apply citywide, and may result in luminaires spec. d on a pole-by-pole basis, or at least more than LED luminaire part number for, say replacing a 150 or 250 W HPS light. This may prove to be unnecessarily costly, and also create a maintenance / stocking headache for the City. It may also have an adverse impact on schedule as these design parameters are worked out after award, requiring time to complete before an order is placed. We are suggesting that the City consider establishing a standard pole spacing spec. standard roadway designation for each street (major, collector, local), and /or standard conflict pedestrian designation by street for the purpose of bidding, design, and ordering. 4.A For the purposes of bidding use Attachment O Photometric Parameters for 15 Representative Locations as the typical situation and spacing between street lights. The 15 representative locations used IES Light distribution of Type III for the existing cobra head luminaires and Type V for the Acorn post top type luminaires. The photometric analysis to be done on these 15 locations will determine the use of Type III or Type II LED typically across the City. Of the 15 locations the Shattuck location and Alcatraz location has Acorn post top luminaires using DG The City would like to standardize all post top luminaires to two styles. (1) Acorn type fixture similar to (1) (Phillips/Lumec Serenade S55-SFOK or acceptable equivalent) and alternative (2) (Phillips/Lumec Zenith Z40-SFZ4 or acceptable equivalent). 5. Q. The City indicated at the pre-bid meeting that it expects to hear from the CEC as to the approval status of its $3M loan application on or about the 15 th of this month. It would be helpful to know if the City is going to accept this loan before the proposal is due, possibly impacting who we will be able to secure financing through. 5. A. It is the intent of the City to accept the $3M loan. The City is requiring proposers to submit the two financing options in their submittal package. Page 4 of 10

5 6. Q. Under Bug Rating, a requirement for U0 is requested. This is achievable for Cobra style luminaires but is potentially not achievable for post top luminaires. Does this requirement apply to all or just Cobra style? If not, what is acceptable for post top style, U1 or U2? 6. A. The U0 is intended to apply to both cobra style and preferred post top styles indicated above in the narrative for the bid sheet and answer to question no. 4. The City will give preference to U0 for post top but will accept U1 for post top style replacements. If conversion kits are used for existing King Luminaire K118 or Holophane Washington State Street, the City will work with the proposers to minimize the Up Light to U1 or less. 7.Q In the Measurement/Performance/Safety Standards section, what are the five bullet points with quantities of products shown in the lower right box to be used for? Is there a title or some other information missing with regard to these? Please clarify. 7.A The UI standards are to be used in conjunction with IESNA LM verify that the vendor s proposed LED luminaires have been tested and meet these standards. If the vendor s proposed LED luminaires meets IESNA LM then the City understands that the other UI Standards have also been met. LM-79 luminare and lamp testing fully evaluates the assembled luminaire for total flux, electrical power, efficacy (lm/watt), chromaticity, and angular distribution of light. 8.Q In the luminance standards section, what Pedestrian Conflict Area level (High, Medium, Low) should we use for each of the three road types (Major, Collector, Local) listed? 8.A For major use Pedestrian conflict area level medium, collector use Pedestrian conflict area level medium and for local use Pedestrian conflict area level low. 9.Q. We have yet to receive any solid luminaire recommendations from any manufacturer, adding to the above uncertainties facing the project. We currently understand we may not even receive any mfr. input until next week. Because of the uncertainty surrounding the RFP as it now stands, we are formally requesting a two (2) week extension, allowing us to properly perform our due diligence to recommend the best approach and manufacturer to meet the City s performance and financial objectives. 9.A The bid opening date has been extended until February 13, Q. 10.A. In the Attachment I Bid Sheet, the Autobahn series LED roadway product is listed. We believe this should be listed as the AEL (American Electric Lighting product) Autobahn. Can you please make it clear that this is the AEL Autobahn brand product? Correct, the Autobahn services LED roadway product is AEL Autobahn brand product. Page 5 of 10

6 11.Q. 11.A. 12.Q. 12.A. One additional question (request) I have is related to the first item on the Bid Sheet, for the replacement of the 70W and 100W HPS fixtures. Will you entertain a line item that breaks out, or differentiates the 70W and 100W replacements? There are many good options that we have for the 70W replacement which would allow us to meet RP-8 levels, attain additional savings (vs the 100W) and realize lower procurement costs (vs. the 100W replacement) due to the LED modules used for these fixtures. Line item #1 does not allow for this breakout and I believe it would be in the best interest of the city of Berkeley to allow for the option to review this scenario. See above, Attachment I Bid Sheet has separated the 70 watt and 100 watt categories. There are several locations that can be used to verify the photometric requirements. The 200 watt and 400 watt has not been separated. It is the City s intent to replace the existing 400 watt luminaires with 200 watt equivalent LED luminaires as long as RP-08 photometric levels can be met. Two typical locations using 400 watt fixtures are part of the photometric testing requirements. See Attachment O Photometric Parameters for 15 Representative Locations. Per addendum #A, the response to Q1 indicates that the electrical component needs to be performed by certified electricians paid prevailing wages. Can the prevailing wage for Light Fixture Maintenance be used? Attached is the CA Dept. of Industrial Relations Scope, which allows replacement of light fixtures. No, the Light Fixture Maintenance classification cannot be used for this conversion project. A general electrician journeyman is the only certification that can be used on this project. 13.Q Under Section 2.7, under Project Planning, the RFP requests that bidders: Develop 15- year energy (kwh and cost), maintenance cost, and greenhouse gas (GHG) savings projections to ensure results and cost-effectiveness of project options. GHG savings are to be based on CPUC/E3 projections of average emissions coefficients for PG&E". Based on the PG&E Greenhouse Gas information that we found (link below), future emissions are only estimated until If bidders need to model out 15 years of GHG savings, what coefficient should be bidders use for years ? on_factor_info_sheet.pdf 13.A. 14.Q. If, at the time that this deliverable is prepared, projections are not available beyond a specific year, assume the coefficient will not change after that year. In Section 4.5 Post Installation Activities Including Administration (Page 5), can the City please confirm that the requirement of +/-1 meter relates to x and y coordinates? Further, are you looking for a specific device to meet this requirement or is it just based on the visual results? Page 6 of 10

7 14.A. The locations requirement of +/- 1 meter (or approximately 3 feet) does relates to the x and y coordinates. Most available handheld GPS data collectors meet the standard of +/- 1 meter (or approximately 3 feet) standard. 15.Q In Section 4.5 Post Installation Activities Including Administration (Page 5), it states: hyperlinks to nameplate images of luminaires replaced and other associated attributes." Would the City find it acceptable for the bidder to offer a folder with photos titled by pole number? Or is it required to include a hyperlinked image of each individual new fixture within the GIS electronic file? Also, is there a margin of error allowed on the photo files (in case a small number of locations are not captured)? 15.A It is required to include a hyperlinked image of each individual new fixture (Luminaire) within the GIS electronic file. All locations where luminaires are replaced are to be captured. 16.Q. The Replacement Plan is expected to include the following fields. Please explain what these are: (1) City Facility ID (2) Roadway Type 16.A. 17.Q. 17.A. Each luminaire has a unique ID number and 90% of the time the ID number is stenciled or posted on the Luminaire s pole. These unique ID numbers are to be captured or its location needs to be identified so that unique ID number can be replaced or restored. The roadway type is the description of roadway or travel surface where the street light is located. The roadway type will be major, collector, local or walkway (sidewalk, path) or bikeway (bike path) or parking lot. In Section VIII. Payment (Page 9 of the RFP), it states: If the units are not delivered per the requirements of this RFP, a penalty of $100 per day per unit will be assessed. Could the City please provide clarity on this penalty? Is this referring to liquidated damages? What are the specific requirements needed to avoid this penalty? This project is not a construction project and the contract that will be executed with the successful proposer is not a construction type contract. Within the scope of services for this project, the City intends to include a clause that will assess a penalty for nonperformance of the contract s scope of services. It is very important to the City that the scope of services for this project be completed and all applicable rebates be applied and processed before the PG&E deadline. The City will work closely with the successful proposer to ensure that the project is completed on-time and all appropriate paper work is submitted to PG&E. 18.Q. In Section VIII. Payment, it states: The estimated value of the PG&E rebate plus 5% of the total contract price shall be withheld until the City accepts the project as complete. Doesn t the PG&E rebate being withheld in addition to the 5% retainage result in violation of current State law that limits the entire retainage to 5%? 18.A. Again, this is not a construction project and the contract that will be executed between Page 7 of 10

8 the proposer and the City will not be a construction type contract. However, for clarity at this time, the City will retain 5 % of the total contract price until final acceptance of the contract as complete. Project completion for this project means all applicable luminaires has been converted to LED; all reconciliation and GIS work has been completed and accepted; all applicable rebate paper work has been properly completed, submitted, accepted, and/or processed by PG&E. 19.Q Not used 19.A. 20.Q. 20.A. Not used Cell Receptacle Please verify if you are requiring the new ANSI C receptacle, as our understanding is that it should be available by 2nd quarter, Yes, it is the City s intent that ANSI C receptacle be provided if it is available. 21.Q Post Top LED fixtures will not meet a U0 rating. There will be some uplight due to the stippled globe and or reflection from other surfaces. Please verify that this will be OK for the ornamental post top options. 21.A. See answer to Question No Q Does Attachment N refer to ornamental retrofit kits and new post top fixtures? 22.A. Yes. See Revised Attachment N of this addendum. If the proposer cannot meet the general specifications of Attachment N, then they need to include what cannot be met and how they can meet the intent and how it may differ for City evaluation. 23.Q Is a DLC listing required on all retrofit kits and all new fixtures? The reason we ask is because only DLC-listed fixtures are eligible for PG&E rebates. 23.A Yes. 24.Q Is there a term limit on the loan (e.g. 10, 12, 15, 20 years)? 24.A. 25.Q. 25.A. 15 years, as specified in the RFP. Are there photometric requirements for the new post top fixtures? Yes, see discussion above for Item III.2.7, Scope of Service, Project Planning, Photometric Analysis 26.Q In the meeting you addressed the 90% of lamps to be retro fit. The 10% mixed bunch is our question, when will you call out the specs on these for the bid. 26.A. It is the intent of the City to convert all street lighting to LED equivalent. See Page 8 of 10

9 discussion above on Revised Attachment I Bid Sheet. 27.Q. In the meeting you stated that pictures may follow also to clear any questions as to type of lamp and fixture. 27.A. See discussion on Attachment I Bid Sheet above and Attachments P and Q. 28.Q. 28.A. 29.Q. 29.A. 30.Q. 30.A. 31.Q. After review of the revised bid sheet and related specifications, is it the City s intent to standardize replacement of the existing 70W and 100W luminaires with one LED luminaire, in essence collapsing two wattage categories into one? Or is the City seeking to have the contractors propose an appropriate replacement for the 70 W luminaires, and separately the 100W class? See discussion of Attachment I Bid sheet above. Additionally, is the City seeking to eliminate the 400W luminaires, and replace with appropriate LED luminaires that typically replace 200W HPS luminaires, in essence, collapsing the 400W class and the 200W class into one class? Or is the City seeking to have the contractors propose a separate replacement LED luminaires for the both the 200W and 400W HPS classes? See discussion of Attachment I Bid sheet above. What is the voltage of the streetlights across the City? Are there only 120V circuits, or both 120 and 240V circuits? The payback analysis calculation may be impacted by this information, given the different PG&E rates associated with the voltage classes. (1) 95% of the 70 and 100 watt fixtures are 120v; (2) 90+% of the watt fixtures are 208v or 240v; (3) 95% of ornamental fixtures are 120v; (4) only a few variation on ornamental fixture (few locations) v. There is no mention of a bid bond or general bonding requirements in the RFP or provided sample agreement. Will bonding be required with the proposal? In the alternative, will the selected contractor be expected to provide a performance bond as part of the contracting process? 31.A No bid bond is required. A performance bond is being considered and not a requirement at this time. However, the City reserves the right to include requirements of a performance bond as part of the final negotiations with the successful proposer. 32.Q. The pricing, payback and schedule will be impacted by the proposed replacement and retrofit ornamental / post top lights. In particular, the City is specifying retrofit LED kits for several categories of lights. We are requesting the City provide pictures and additional information of all known existing decorative lights so we can properly assess the requirements and prepare a qualified pricing proposal on how to address these decorative lights. Page 9 of 10

10 32.A. See discussion of Attachment I Bid sheet above and Attachments P and Q. 33.Q. 33.A. 34.Q. Spec Requires IP54. Is UL Wet Listing acceptable for wiring compartment? Some manufacturers only give IP ratings for the optical compartment. It is the intent that proposed luminaires meet the provided general specifications. Any luminaires being proposed that deviate from the provided specifications needs to be documented and explained in the associated write up by the proposer. Under PE receptacle, what does When available mean regarding the PE receptacle. This will not be available at bid time and may not be available when fixtures are ordered for the project. 34.A See the answer to Question No. 20. It is the City s intent that ANSI C receptacle be provided if it is available. It is anticipated that when luminaires (fixtures) are ordered it will be in the 2 nd quarter of Q. 35.A. Is there a location requirement for the photocell receptacle when used with a post top luminaire? There is no location requirement for the photocell receptacle. The location will depend on the proposed post top Luminaire. See answer to Question No Q Wanted to see if there would be any clarification on the fixture types. I see on the bid sheet manufacture s are identified for the existing fixture, but fixture part numbers are typically not included and there is no description as to what the fixture types are. Descriptions like those listed below would help us put the most comprehensive set of replacement solutions together. Post Top Cobra Head Area Luminaire Wall Pack Canopy Please let me know if it will be possible to get clarification on this. 36.A. See discussion of Attachment I Bid sheet above. Page 10 of 10