City of Tacoma Environmental Services/Solid Waste Management SWM CNG Fueling Equipment RFP RFP Specification No. ES F. QUESTIONS and ANSWERS

Transcription

1 City of Tacoma Environmental Services/Solid Waste Management SWM CNG Fueling Equipment RFP RFP Specification No. ES F QUESTIONS and ANSWERS All interested parties had the opportunity to submit questions in writing by to Samol Hefley, Senior Buyer by February 22, The answers to the questions received are provided below and posted to the City s website at Navigate to Current Contracting Opportunities Supplies and then click Questions and Answers for this Specification. This information IS NOT considered an addendum. Respondents should consider this information when submitting their proposals. Question 1: Section , A, 6, p: Is it acceptable to offer history of past successful compressor projects as evidence of proven package design in lieu of an analysis report provided that the package and compressor are substantially the same? Answer 1: A history of similar packages will be accepted in lieu of a vibration study prior to the design and fabrication of the compressor package. The compressors will still be required to undergo and pass on site vibration testing during commissioning. An Addendum to the Request For Proposal will be issued to address these Technical Specification changes. Question 2: Section , B, 2, e: X-ray films reference individual welds and weld maps are not typically supplied. Piping Isometric drawings and test x-ray films can be supplied. Will this be acceptable? Answer 2: The Request for Proposal Technical Specifications will stand as written. Question 3: Section , B, 1, a: Industry process tubing fittings are carbon steel coated with Tough Shield. Will these be acceptable in protected environments such as within the compressor package, valve panels, dispensers, defueling panels, and filter panels. Answer 3: This specification section clarifies in 2.02.B.2.b that Tough Shield will be permitted in the compressor package only. All other fittings in panels and dispensers shall be 316SS. The word Tuff as referenced in the specifications shall be revised to Tough. Question 4: ISection , B, F: Will Oasis ball valves that have the same form and function of the approved manufacturers be considered an approved equal? Answer 4: Perhaps the reference was to Clause G (high pressure) not F (low pressure). Oasis is not considered equal to SVF as it is not a 3 piece valve. Proposers shall provide pricing for the SVF H7 valves as the base bid but can propose the Oasis valves as a cost reduction alternative if desired. Question 5: Section , B, H: Will Parker and/or Anderson Greenwood valves be considered an approved equal? Page 1 of 7

2 Answer 5: These valves will not be approved as an equal. Question 6: Section , J: Will pressure transducer manufactures of GEM or AST (American Sensor Technologies) be considered approved equals? Answer 6: Pressure transducers manufactured by GEM will be considered an approved equal as allowed by the specification. Question 7: Section , L: Will Parker and/or Anderson Greenwood valves be considered an approved equal? Answer 7: These valves will not be approved as an equal. Question 8: Section , A, 3: Would it be acceptable to select tubing wall thickness/mawp in accordance with the applicable process section? Answer 8: The wall thicknesses specified apply to all tubing downstream of the final compressor stage. The clause wording allows the use of larger diameters with appropriate wall thicknesses for interstage tubing (see language in parenthesis in the last sentence of this section). Question 9: Section , D: Will aluminum ID tags be an acceptable use of material for valve identification? Answer 9: Yes, with a permanent connection. Zip ties are not acceptable. An Addendum to the technical specification will be issued allowing aluminum ID tags. Question 10: Section , A, 2: Would high velocity air purge be acceptable for removal of loose materials prior to tubing fabrication? Answer 10: Cut ends shall be mechanically de-burred. A high velocity air purge can then be used to clear filings. An Addendum to the technical specifications will be issued allowing for high velocity air purge. Question 11: Section , C: and D Would WEG and/or ABB be acceptable as an equal for motor circuit breakers and SCR motor controls? Answer 11: ABB is acceptable for motor control and circuit breakers. An Addendum to the technical specifications will be issued to allow for ABB as an acceptable product for motor circuit breakers and SCR motor control equipment. Question 12: Section , G: Would WEG be considered an approved equal for Motor selection? Answer 12: WEG is acceptable for motors. An Addendum to the technical specifications will be issued to allow WEG as an acceptable product for motors. Question 13: Section , D: Motor winding temperatures and integral heaters are not typically monitored on this size of electric motor. Industry standard equipment is typically supplied without winding temperature monitoring and integral heaters, is this acceptable? Page 2 of 7

3 Answer 13: No, motor winding temperatures and integral heaters will be required for electric motors as outlined in Request for Proposal Technical Specifications. Question 14: Section F: 25% additional capacity may not be feasible in all cases. Will less capacity be acceptable? Answer 14: No. the bidder shall meet the specified 25% additional capacity. Note that this requirement pertains only to the MCP. There is a minimum size requirement in section for the MCP. The bidders will far exceed the 25% additional capacity if they follow the minimum size requirement. Note also that the specification incorrect on the location of the MCP and MCC both of these panels are mounted outdoors so they must be NEMA 3R or NEMA 4 rated. An addendum to the RFP will be issued to address specification changes. Question 15: Section , J, 4: Is it acceptable to provide low lube flow rate and low level switches rated for use in CL1 Div 2 hazardous area as it provided with industry standard? Answer 15: Yes, the specification wording does not require Division 1 rated devices. Class I, Question 16: Section , K 4: Typically, high pressure inter-stage filters are drained using the same valve, lower pressure filters are combined and drained together utilizing a common low pressure drain valve. Will this be acceptable? Answer 16: Answer 16: An Addendum will be issued changing the Request for Proposal Technical Specifications to read as follows: Each separator shall include its own check valve. Drainage system shall have sufficient flow control to ensure that high pressure stages are vented to the recovery tank first with lower pressure stages are vented only after the high pressure stages are sufficiently reduced in pressure. CNG Equipment Supplier shall use no fewer than two actuators and two solenoid valves to provide this flow control. All actuated valves shall be normally open (NO) with its own pilot solenoid valve. Separators and filters shall be flushed hourly and also on shutdown of the compressor to the recovery tank(s). Question 17: Section P, 3: Is it acceptable to provide industry standard transducers rated for CL1 Div2 hazardous area within the compressor package as the package is designed for CL1 Div2? Answer 17: Yes, the specification wording does not require Division 1 rated devices. Class I, Question 18: Section P, 4: Would Type K thermocouples be acceptable? Answer 18: Yes Type K thermocouples will be allowed. An Addendum to the Request for Proposal Technical Specifications will be issued to allow Type K thermocouples. Question 19: Section Q, 7: Based on the size of the equipment requested, an exhaust fan is non-typical. Is it suitable to utilize the coil fan to exhaust air from the enclosure when the specified ambient temperature is reached? Page 3 of 7

4 Answer 19: The specification is worded to allow either the use of a dedicated exhaust fan or the use of the cooler fan. Question 20: Section Q, 8: Would CL1 Div 2 LED light fixtures that is not explosion proof be acceptable? Answer 20: Yes, the specification wording does not require Division 1 rated devices. Class I, Question 21: Section R: Would history of operating like compressor/motor combinations successfully without the use of a flywheel be acceptable in lieu of providing a flywheel on the package? Answer 21: Yes, the requirement for a flywheel will be removed from the requirements. An Addendum will be issued to the Request for Proposal Technical Specifications removing this requirement. Question 22: Section Q, 9: Would a minimum 1200 recirculating heater remote mounted from the compressor block be acceptable in lieu of a minimum 1200 watt immersion heater mounted in the crankcase to prevent from baking oil? Answer 22: Yes this heater can be remote mounted. An Addendum will be issued to the Request Proposal Technical Specifications addressing this change. Question 23: Section A, 4 and 2.01 B, 5: Is it acceptable to provide industry standard transducers rated for CL1 and Div 2 hazardous area? Answer 23: Yes, the specification wording does not require Division 1 rated devices. Class I, Question 24: Section A, 6 and 2.01 B, 6: Is it acceptable to provide industry standard ASCO or similar solenoids rated for CL1 Div2 hazardous area? Answer 24: Yes, the specification wording does not require Division 1 rated devices. Class I, Question 25: Section J, 5, f: Is it acceptable to provide industry standard transducers rated for CL1 and Div 2 hazardous area? Answer 25: Yes, the specification wording does not require Division 1 rated devices. Class I, Question 26: Will the City accept a deductible of $250,000 on Commercial Property (CP) Insurance? Given the City owns the station, property insurance is not relevant to the equipment supplier. Answer 26: The City will not accept a deductible of $250,000 for Commercial Property (CP) Insurance. Page 4 of 7

5 Question 27: Will the City waive Garage Keepers Legal Liability (GKLL) Insurance? This is not applicable to the project scope. Answer 27: An Addendum will be issued removing the requirement for Garage Keepers Legal Liability (GKLL) Insurance. Question 28: Does the City believe Inland Marine Insurance is applicable to the project? If so, will the City accept a deductible of $10,000 for Inland Marine Insurance? Answer 28: The requirement for Inland Marine Insurance is applicable to this project. The City will not raise the deductible requirement as requested. Question 29: What is the City s plan for CNG fueling during the construction process? Will the existing equipment remain in service until the new equipment is commissioned? Answer 29: The existing equipment will continue to operate until the new equipment is operational. There will be a phased process to cut-over from existing to new equipment. Question 30: Will the City allow equipment that can only be maintained by the OEM? Answer 30: The Request for Proposal indicates the Maintenance Agreement as an alternate or option. This allows for vendors to supply equipment but not propose on the Maintenance Agreement. This will be taken into consideration as part of the proposal evaluation and scoring. Question 31: Is the CNG station design included in the scope of work? If so, where should this pricing be included? Answer 31: The equipment specified is intended to be widely serviceable not just by the OEM. CNG station design is not included in the scope of work. CNG Equipment Supplier will be required to provide drawings and information as per the Request for Proposal to provide the required information to the station designers. Question 32: Can the City provide the pricing form and the equipment specification in an excel file format? Answer 32: An excel file will be provided on the Purchasing website when the Addendum is posted. Question 33: Will the City incorporate the following language in the pricing form to ensure the City is exempt from appropriate taxes? Plus applicable sales, use taxes and fees assessed by governmental agencies that are based, measured or determined by reference to the selling price, gallons, or gas sold or used in connection with this agreement unless an applicable exemption certificate is provided. Answer 33: No, This is not part of the standard City language. City will verify any required taxes prior to contract execution. Question 34: Will the City extend the submittal due date to Friday, March 14th? Twoweek turnaround from City responses will provide bidders adequate time to finalize proposals. Page 5 of 7

6 Answer 34: No, Proposals are due on March 5, Question 35: Please confirm if prevailing wage is applicable. If so, please confirm whether this is only applicable to the maintenance scope of work? Answer 35: Prevailing wage is applicable to the Maintenance Agreement portion of the RFP. Question 36: Process gas cooler designed with discharge gas at a maximum of ambient +25F on the interstage sections and ambient +20F on the aftercooler section. With Tacoma having considerably low average temperatures, this approach should be sufficient to meet fueling requirements. Is this acceptable? Answer 36: Please refer to the requirements in the Request for Proposal Technical Specifications. The low suction pressure application makes generous cooler sizing an important factor. Question 37: A compressor manufacturer is proposing a serpentine cooler which is sectioned into multiple "circuits" of tubing in each section. It is unlike a box header style cooler where individual tubes can be plugged and render an entire circuit out of service. Can this oversize requirement be omitted? Answer 37: The Request for Proposal Technical Specifications allows for the use of the serpentine cooler but the overdesign requirement remains in place. Question 38: A compressor manufacturer is proposing an enclosure exterior fabricated of mild steel and powder coated white. Is this acceptable? Answer 38: An Addendum will be issued to the Request for Proposal Technical Specifications to allow for enclosure exterior to be fabricated of mild steel and powder coated white. Question 39: Class I, Division 2, Group D interior lighting is industry standard, but is not explosion proof. Will the Class I, Division 2 lighting be acceptable? Answer 39: An Addendum will be issued to the Request for Proposal Technical Specification clarifying classification requirements. An Addendum will be issued to the Request for Question 40: If a flywheel is not needed according to past history of successful operation and/or a torsional study, can this requirement be excluded? Answer 40: An Addendum will be issued to the Request for Proposal Technical Specifications to remove the requirement for a flywheel. See Question and Answer to Item 21 above. Question 41: 1/4" and 3/8" instrument fittings shall be 316SS Swagelock. Process gas tubing connections 1/2" and larger shall be industry standard, Parker Seal-Lok zinc coated (Tough Shield) carbon steel. Will this be acceptable? Answer 41: The Request for Proposal Technical Specifications allows Tough Shield in the compressor package only and 316SS in all other equipment. Page 6 of 7

7 Question 42: What is the design ambient temperature this requirement is based on? If using an average high of 80F ambient, this requirement is possible. Answer 42: There is no reference to design ambient temperatures in Technical Specification Part 2.01.G. Page 7 of 7