Okaloosa County Sealed Solicitation
Title: Telecommunications Maintenance for the Okaloosa County Fiber Optic Network
Deadline: 4/10/2024 3:00 PM (UTC-06:00) Central Time (US & Canada)
Status: Awarded
Solicitation Number: ITB IT 39-24
Description: SCOPE OF SERVICES:
Okaloosa County (“Owner” or “County”) owns and operates a robust comprehensive fiber optic telecommunications utility located throughout the county and local military installations. This telecommunications system requires modification and maintenance as well as emergency restoration and repair. Okaloosa County requires a qualified, experienced contractor to be available as needed to perform critical conduit and fiber optic system installation, repair, troubleshooting and maintenance activities.
All specifications relating to conduit, pull box and fiber optic installation shall be compliant with EIA/TIA 568 for Fiber Optics unless specified in the scope of services of this document. Equipment/Vendor specific standard recommended installation procedures will be followed unless otherwise noted and approved by OWNER.
It is impossible to define and scope every possible emergency, addition, or maintenance activity; therefore, the bid sheet contains common pay items routinely used by Okaloosa County. In the event that additional OWNER approved material or personnel pricing is required it will be at fair market value in accordance with industry standards unless otherwise stated in this document or negotiated and approved by OWNER via contract or task order.
Contractor will be responsible for restoring any fencing, paving, landscaping, backfill and compaction, temporary grassing, etc. that was removed or damaged during contractor’s operations, and restoring site back to original condition.
Documents:
| Documents as of 3/15/2024 |
|---|
| Login to view documents |
Addition 1
Posted: 4/4/2024
Type of Addition: Addendum 1
Overview: Questions and Answers
Solicitation #: ITB IT 39-24
Documents:
Addition 2
Posted: 4/11/2024
Type of Addition: In Review
Addition 3
Posted: 5/17/2024
Type of Addition: Award Information / Creek Enterprise, Inc. & Gridsource Incorporated, LLC. / 5/3/24
Documents:
Question 1
Posted: 3/20/2024
Question: Is the bidder required to bid on all groups to qualify for award; or can we elect to bid certain sections
Response: Not bidding on all sections will not necessarily disqualify them.
Question 2
Posted: 3/20/2024
Question: Can we inquire the annual dollar amount that was spent on the existing current contract that was bid in 2020?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 3
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: Specification Item item #1 - noting the 3 identified placement methods and conduit specifications, can the County confirm the level of restoration is limited to that described in the Scope of Work last paragraph and excludes any/all concrete or asphalt restoration and if any of that is part of a work orders approved design those costs would be handled separately?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 4
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #1, is there any way to know what mix of work may be urban or rural rights of way and if any work requires substantial sidewalk-lane-road closure; police assisted or other travel impacting maintenance of traffic that those costs would also be compensated separately?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 5
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #2, noting the owner is to provide the work order engineering and design, can we assume this pricing is based upon designs compliant with the existing FDOT standard indices for bridge attached conduit and any deviations would allow for additional compensation request for deviations in materials or method of deployment? (such as bulletproof fiberglass ducts, snorkel truck placement...)
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 6
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #3, the specification describes the cable construction, understood. The specification does not provide guidance on the glass specification required the County’s standard. Is the County optical performance standard basic Corning OS2 (.4/.3dB), SMF28e (.35/.25dB) or Ultra Low Loss (ULL) (.32/.21dB) attenuation?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 7
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #4, we do not see any reference to tracer wire or delineator markers such as the FDOT utilizes. a. Does the County require any delineators for their projects? i. If so is there any specific spacing or labeling for those? ii. And is there any requirement to connect to any locate capability?b. Does the County use a separate CU tracer wire to support locating needs? i. If so, what gauge and color of jacket is required? ii. If so, how often are the ground rods placed in hand holes? iii. If so, does the tracer wire to any delineator markers?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 8
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec item #8 Fusion Splices, please confirm the dB specified is a reference to a core alignment fusion splicer measurement.
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 9
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #8 Fusion Splices, would the County consider adding a second line for Splices <24 count at the majority of connecting sites that would be for “drops” vs sites of 96F or greater for backbone repairs?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 10
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec item #9, Terminations that identifies County preferred individual pigtails w/ SC connectors, can you define if the County desires 900micron, 2mil or 3 mil pigtail jacketing? a. Would the County consider adding an item for newer Corning 12F Cassettes with the specified SC Terminations, SC Coupler panel and internal splice tray as option for larger termination site?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 11
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #10 Splice Closures, please confirm this item is only for the splice housing and associated fusion splice tray to accommodate the line-item fiber count and excludes splices that are to be paid separately by contract line item.
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 12
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #11 Fiber Distribution Centers, please confirm this item is only for the termination/splice housing, SC coupler panel and associated fusion splice tray to accommodate the line-item fiber count and excludes the Fiber Terminations that are to be paid separately by contract line item for each Pigtail-Splice-Test.
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 13
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #12 Building Entries. Does the County have any detail drawing or specifications for the requested building entrance? Is the typical entrance to assume transition from PVC/HDPE to GRS for above ground routing? And a core drill to penetrate a facility? If so 2 or 4”?
Response: See Addendum 1
Question 14
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #12 Building Entries - What size and specification of box would be required over the penetration? NEMA 3R or 4X? Of required size such as 18” x 18” x 6”?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/4/2024
Type of Addition: Addendum 1
Overview: Questions and Answers
Solicitation #: ITB IT 39-24
Documents:
Posted: 4/11/2024
Type of Addition: In Review
Posted: 5/17/2024
Type of Addition: Award Information / Creek Enterprise, Inc. & Gridsource Incorporated, LLC. / 5/3/24
Documents:
Posted: 3/20/2024
Question: Is the bidder required to bid on all groups to qualify for award; or can we elect to bid certain sections
Response: Not bidding on all sections will not necessarily disqualify them.
Posted: 3/20/2024
Question: Can we inquire the annual dollar amount that was spent on the existing current contract that was bid in 2020?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: Specification Item item #1 - noting the 3 identified placement methods and conduit specifications, can the County confirm the level of restoration is limited to that described in the Scope of Work last paragraph and excludes any/all concrete or asphalt restoration and if any of that is part of a work orders approved design those costs would be handled separately?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #1, is there any way to know what mix of work may be urban or rural rights of way and if any work requires substantial sidewalk-lane-road closure; police assisted or other travel impacting maintenance of traffic that those costs would also be compensated separately?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #2, noting the owner is to provide the work order engineering and design, can we assume this pricing is based upon designs compliant with the existing FDOT standard indices for bridge attached conduit and any deviations would allow for additional compensation request for deviations in materials or method of deployment? (such as bulletproof fiberglass ducts, snorkel truck placement...)
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #3, the specification describes the cable construction, understood. The specification does not provide guidance on the glass specification required the County’s standard. Is the County optical performance standard basic Corning OS2 (.4/.3dB), SMF28e (.35/.25dB) or Ultra Low Loss (ULL) (.32/.21dB) attenuation?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: In spec. item #4, we do not see any reference to tracer wire or delineator markers such as the FDOT utilizes. a. Does the County require any delineators for their projects? i. If so is there any specific spacing or labeling for those? ii. And is there any requirement to connect to any locate capability?b. Does the County use a separate CU tracer wire to support locating needs? i. If so, what gauge and color of jacket is required? ii. If so, how often are the ground rods placed in hand holes? iii. If so, does the tracer wire to any delineator markers?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec item #8 Fusion Splices, please confirm the dB specified is a reference to a core alignment fusion splicer measurement.
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #8 Fusion Splices, would the County consider adding a second line for Splices <24 count at the majority of connecting sites that would be for “drops” vs sites of 96F or greater for backbone repairs?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec item #9, Terminations that identifies County preferred individual pigtails w/ SC connectors, can you define if the County desires 900micron, 2mil or 3 mil pigtail jacketing? a. Would the County consider adding an item for newer Corning 12F Cassettes with the specified SC Terminations, SC Coupler panel and internal splice tray as option for larger termination site?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #10 Splice Closures, please confirm this item is only for the splice housing and associated fusion splice tray to accommodate the line-item fiber count and excludes splices that are to be paid separately by contract line item.
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #11 Fiber Distribution Centers, please confirm this item is only for the termination/splice housing, SC coupler panel and associated fusion splice tray to accommodate the line-item fiber count and excludes the Fiber Terminations that are to be paid separately by contract line item for each Pigtail-Splice-Test.
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #12 Building Entries. Does the County have any detail drawing or specifications for the requested building entrance? Is the typical entrance to assume transition from PVC/HDPE to GRS for above ground routing? And a core drill to penetrate a facility? If so 2 or 4”?
Response: See Addendum 1
Posted: 4/2/2024
Question: For spec. item #12 Building Entries - What size and specification of box would be required over the penetration? NEMA 3R or 4X? Of required size such as 18” x 18” x 6”?
Response: See Addendum 1