Peralta Community College District Sealed Solicitation
Title: RFP 21-22/04 District-Wide Network Infrastructure Upgrade
Deadline: 10/1/2021 2:00 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
Status: In Review
Solicitation Number: RFP 21-22/04
Description: Peralta Community College District (“District”) is seeking proposals from qualified persons, firms, partnerships, corporations, associations, or professional organizations to provide value engineering, master scheduling, cost estimating, budgeting, and construction services for the District – Wide Network Infrastructure Upgrade (“Project”) in accordance with Public Contract Code section 20651. Each Proposer is required to possess one or more of the following State of California contractor license(s): C-7 or C-10. The Proposer's contractor license(s) must remain active and in good standing throughout the term of the Contract. Proposer’s, are required to be registered as a public works contractor with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to the Labor Code.
Pre-Bid Meeting Date: 8/31/2021 10:00 AM
Pre-Bid Meeting Details: Please sign up if you plan to attend the pre-bid meeting. Hi there, You are invited to a Zoom meeting. When: Aug 31, 2021 10:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Register in advance for this meeting: https://cccconfer.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJIoc-qtrjsuEtUVQ9hQW2WxOHLTScfrlujK After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.
Documents:
Addition 1
Posted: 9/9/2021
Type of Addition: 21-22/04 Sign In Sheet
Overview: Here's a list of the firms who attended the Mandatory preproposal meeting via Zoom.
Documents:
Addition 2
Posted: 9/15/2021
Type of Addition: Addendum # 1
Documents:
Addition 4
Posted: 9/20/2021
Type of Addition: Addendum Three
Documents:
Addition 6
Posted: 9/25/2021
Type of Addition: Addendum Five
Overview: Here's the final addendum.
Documents:
Addition 7
Posted: 7/7/2022
Type of Addition: In Review
Question 1
Posted: 8/31/2021
Question: Looking at the approval / PO timelines, and then material delivery, it appears that students and faculty will onsite. Is it therefore expected that we should bid this as: A) 2nd shift B) 3rd shift C) A combination of the above; or something else? Please elaborate on sift bidding expectations.
Response: The bids will factor in the following shift differential rates for prevailing wages: • 2nd Shift (3:00pm - 11:00pm/3:30pm - 11:30pm) - 50% • 3rd Shift (11:00pm - 7:00am/11:30pm - 7:30am) - 50%
Question 2
Posted: 9/1/2021
Question: Please confirm that the PLA is applicable for this project.
Response: The Project Labor Agreement (PLA) is not applicable for this project.
Question 3
Posted: 9/7/2021
Question: Dear Peralta Team, will you be posting the official list of attendees to the mandatory pre-bid conference that was held on 8/31/21 (and on what date will that be posted)?
Response: Yes. Wednesday, September 8, 2021.
Question 4
Posted: 9/7/2021
Question: The RFP states C-7 or C-10 license is required, however there appears to be sufficient conduit work that would require a C-10. Please confirm if a C-10 license is required.
Response: A C-10 license is required. A C-10 license holder with a C-7 license is preferred.
Question 5
Posted: 9/7/2021
Question: Will the prime contractor be required to sign the District's PLA?
Response: The Project Labor Agreement (PLA) is not applicable for this project.
Question 6
Posted: 9/8/2021
Question: Dear Peralta, Please advise on the following items discussed on the walk that may be divergencies, changes, additions and/or modifications to the RFP with respect to the District Office: District Office: DO#1: New conduit in MDF will need to be innerduct conduit--is this correct? If true, where else will this be the case? DO#2 There was some uncertainty with respect to fill ratios of existing underground pathways and/or conduit between buildings. We were unable to thoroughly inspect this on the job walk without being disruptive to the day's timeline. Can we confirm if new conduit will be needed; and if so, will trenching therefore be in-scope? DO#3: In the IDF room adjacent to room 100, i we received a verbal update from the Peralta team that 48 ports were needed, along with new cable, ne conduit, and potentially a new rack, and possibly a new switch. Can we confirm if there is a change and/or increase in scope with respect to the RFP, and if so, please elaborate? DO#4: A&R Building, Room 171. The Peralta team gave a verbal update that a new rack would be needed (not in RFP). Please confirm added / change in scope and specifications. DO#5: International Affairs & Distance Learning building. In the IDF, it was noted that there was little existing space in the current rack and that a new rack would be needed. Please confirm added scope and specifications. DO#6: In Security module (old Sheriff's department). The Peralta team verbally noted that a special shortened rack would be needed in order to avoid interfering with monitoring displays. Please confirm added scope. DO#7. Also in the Security module area. The Peralta team verbally advised that fewer WAPs would be needed than originally specified in the RFP. New requirement would be 2 WAPs. Please confirm reduction / change in scope.
Response: DO#1: New conduit in MDF will need to be innerduct conduit--is this correct? If true, where else will this be the case? Yes, wherever new fiber is required. DO#2 There was some uncertainty with respect to fill ratios of existing underground pathways and/or conduit between buildings. We were unable to thoroughly inspect this on the job walk without being disruptive to the day's timeline. Can we confirm if new conduit will be needed; and if so, will trenching therefore be in-scope? Existing conduits should be used. Trenching is not in scope. DO#3: In the IDF room adjacent to room 100, i we received a verbal update from the Peralta team that 48 ports were needed, along with new cable, ne conduit, and potentially a new rack, and possibly a new switch. Can we confirm if there is a change and/or increase in scope with respect to the RFP, and if so, please elaborate? If this question is related to the Foundation portable outside of the Purchasing Warehouse, then the answer is ‘no.’ This is does not change the scope with respect to the RFP. See Part2, 3.1 Copper CAT6a Cabling. DO#4: A&R Building, Room 171. The Peralta team gave a verbal update that a new rack would be needed (not in RFP). Please confirm added / change in scope and specifications. Under Section 5 Communications Optical Fiber Backbone Cabling, section 2.3 specifies a 19” Universal Rack system is needed for fiber installations when an existing rack is full. This is not a scope change. We are adding this to the addendum to clarify the RFP: A&R Building requires new 19” universal rack DO#5: International Affairs & Distance Learning building. In the IDF, it was noted that there was little existing space in the current rack and that a new rack would be needed. Please confirm added scope and specifications. Under Section 5 Communications Optical Fiber Backbone Cabling, section 2.3 specifies a 19” Universal Rack system is needed for fiber installations when an existing rack is full. This is not a scope change. We are adding this to the addendum to clarify the RFP: International Affairs Building requires new 19” universal rack DO#6: In Security module (old Sheriff's department). The Peralta team verbally noted that a special shortened rack would be needed in order to avoid interfering with monitoring displays. Please confirm added scope. This is already in scope. (See RFP page 77) DO#7. Also, in the Security module area. The Peralta team verbally advised that fewer WAPs would be needed than originally specified in the RFP. New requirement would be 2 WAPs. Please confirm reduction / change in scope. 2 WAPs will be deployed to the Security Office. This does not change the overall number of WAPs specified for the District Office site.
Question 7
Posted: 9/8/2021
Question: Dear Peralta, Please advise on the following items discussed on the walk that may be divergencies, changes, additions and/or modifications to the RFP with respect to College of Alameda: C#1: Mechanical Room. The COA / Peralta team verbally discussed modifying / changing the number of drops in the mechanical room. 12 total drops. Please confirm any modifications to scope. C#2 Bookstore. The COA / Peralta team verbally discussed adding additional drops to cover the required devices. Increase drops to 20 (from 12) for a net gain of 8 drops. Please confirm added scope.
Response: C#1: Mechanical Room. This change is correct, 12 drops. C#2 Bookstore. This change is correct, 20 drops
Question 8
Posted: 9/8/2021
Question: Would you elaborate on why this project is not subject to the District's Project Labor Agreement? We would have to evaluate the possible effects on the construction site environment.
Response: The PLA agreement has expired and the District does not have a current agreement.
Question 9
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: For the District Office, it is mentioned that "20+" UPS's are needed. Can you please provide an exact number.
Response: District Office will require 22 UPS units. This will be reflected in the addendum.
Question 10
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: How many patch cords are needed for each site, and please break these down by size in feet.
Response: We have already responded to this question. Please see the public solicitation.
Question 11
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: For the patch cords, the RFP stipulates Cat6A, even tough the cable standard for these runs is Cat6. Can we therefore use Cat6 patch cords, instead of Cat6A?
Response: Please use Cat6A not Cat6.
Question 12
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: We did not walk the Foundation portables at the District office. The RFP stipulates 64 drops. Can you confirm that this is the correct amount?
Response: Confirming 64 drops between the Foundation portables. This area was toured. These cables will be terminated in Purchasing’s MDF room with a new 19” universal rack.
Question 13
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: We did not walk or view the Fire Alarm panel at the District Office. RFP calls for 12 drops. Can you confirm please?
Response: Confirming 12 drops at the Security Office for the Fire Alarm Panel. This area was toured. New cables and a patch panel will be installed onto the existing rack. This project will not involve configuring or connecting to the Fire Alarm panel. (see RFP page 77)
Question 14
Posted: 9/14/2021
Question: For outdoor WAPs that will require a lift, does the District have lifts that can be used (and if so, what types), or will lift rentals need to be factored into the bid?
Response: Lifts should be factored into the bid.
Question 15
Posted: 9/15/2021
Question: Dear Peralta team, Without an addendum, we are unable to solidify pricing and/or pricing from our SLEB contractors. Given that the addendum has still not been released, we would like to request additional time once the Addendum is released to review it, and potential have additional questions. The October 1, 2021 date for submission may not allow sufficient time to do this.
Response: We have already responded to this question. Please see the public solicitation.
Question 16
Posted: 9/17/2021
Question: Dear Peralta Team, for clarification, can you confirm that all new copper category cable will be 6A. Thank you.
Response: Yes, all new copper category cable will be CAT6A.
Posted: 9/9/2021
Type of Addition: 21-22/04 Sign In Sheet
Overview: Here's a list of the firms who attended the Mandatory preproposal meeting via Zoom.
Documents:
Posted: 9/15/2021
Type of Addition: Addendum # 1
Documents:
Posted: 9/25/2021
Type of Addition: Addendum Five
Overview: Here's the final addendum.
Documents:
Posted: 7/7/2022
Type of Addition: In Review
Posted: 8/31/2021
Question: Looking at the approval / PO timelines, and then material delivery, it appears that students and faculty will onsite. Is it therefore expected that we should bid this as: A) 2nd shift B) 3rd shift C) A combination of the above; or something else? Please elaborate on sift bidding expectations.
Response: The bids will factor in the following shift differential rates for prevailing wages: • 2nd Shift (3:00pm - 11:00pm/3:30pm - 11:30pm) - 50% • 3rd Shift (11:00pm - 7:00am/11:30pm - 7:30am) - 50%
Posted: 9/1/2021
Question: Please confirm that the PLA is applicable for this project.
Response: The Project Labor Agreement (PLA) is not applicable for this project.
Posted: 9/7/2021
Question: Dear Peralta Team, will you be posting the official list of attendees to the mandatory pre-bid conference that was held on 8/31/21 (and on what date will that be posted)?
Response: Yes. Wednesday, September 8, 2021.
Posted: 9/7/2021
Question: The RFP states C-7 or C-10 license is required, however there appears to be sufficient conduit work that would require a C-10. Please confirm if a C-10 license is required.
Response: A C-10 license is required. A C-10 license holder with a C-7 license is preferred.
Posted: 9/7/2021
Question: Will the prime contractor be required to sign the District's PLA?
Response: The Project Labor Agreement (PLA) is not applicable for this project.
Posted: 9/8/2021
Question: Dear Peralta, Please advise on the following items discussed on the walk that may be divergencies, changes, additions and/or modifications to the RFP with respect to the District Office: District Office: DO#1: New conduit in MDF will need to be innerduct conduit--is this correct? If true, where else will this be the case? DO#2 There was some uncertainty with respect to fill ratios of existing underground pathways and/or conduit between buildings. We were unable to thoroughly inspect this on the job walk without being disruptive to the day's timeline. Can we confirm if new conduit will be needed; and if so, will trenching therefore be in-scope? DO#3: In the IDF room adjacent to room 100, i we received a verbal update from the Peralta team that 48 ports were needed, along with new cable, ne conduit, and potentially a new rack, and possibly a new switch. Can we confirm if there is a change and/or increase in scope with respect to the RFP, and if so, please elaborate? DO#4: A&R Building, Room 171. The Peralta team gave a verbal update that a new rack would be needed (not in RFP). Please confirm added / change in scope and specifications. DO#5: International Affairs & Distance Learning building. In the IDF, it was noted that there was little existing space in the current rack and that a new rack would be needed. Please confirm added scope and specifications. DO#6: In Security module (old Sheriff's department). The Peralta team verbally noted that a special shortened rack would be needed in order to avoid interfering with monitoring displays. Please confirm added scope. DO#7. Also in the Security module area. The Peralta team verbally advised that fewer WAPs would be needed than originally specified in the RFP. New requirement would be 2 WAPs. Please confirm reduction / change in scope.
Response: DO#1: New conduit in MDF will need to be innerduct conduit--is this correct? If true, where else will this be the case? Yes, wherever new fiber is required. DO#2 There was some uncertainty with respect to fill ratios of existing underground pathways and/or conduit between buildings. We were unable to thoroughly inspect this on the job walk without being disruptive to the day's timeline. Can we confirm if new conduit will be needed; and if so, will trenching therefore be in-scope? Existing conduits should be used. Trenching is not in scope. DO#3: In the IDF room adjacent to room 100, i we received a verbal update from the Peralta team that 48 ports were needed, along with new cable, ne conduit, and potentially a new rack, and possibly a new switch. Can we confirm if there is a change and/or increase in scope with respect to the RFP, and if so, please elaborate? If this question is related to the Foundation portable outside of the Purchasing Warehouse, then the answer is ‘no.’ This is does not change the scope with respect to the RFP. See Part2, 3.1 Copper CAT6a Cabling. DO#4: A&R Building, Room 171. The Peralta team gave a verbal update that a new rack would be needed (not in RFP). Please confirm added / change in scope and specifications. Under Section 5 Communications Optical Fiber Backbone Cabling, section 2.3 specifies a 19” Universal Rack system is needed for fiber installations when an existing rack is full. This is not a scope change. We are adding this to the addendum to clarify the RFP: A&R Building requires new 19” universal rack DO#5: International Affairs & Distance Learning building. In the IDF, it was noted that there was little existing space in the current rack and that a new rack would be needed. Please confirm added scope and specifications. Under Section 5 Communications Optical Fiber Backbone Cabling, section 2.3 specifies a 19” Universal Rack system is needed for fiber installations when an existing rack is full. This is not a scope change. We are adding this to the addendum to clarify the RFP: International Affairs Building requires new 19” universal rack DO#6: In Security module (old Sheriff's department). The Peralta team verbally noted that a special shortened rack would be needed in order to avoid interfering with monitoring displays. Please confirm added scope. This is already in scope. (See RFP page 77) DO#7. Also, in the Security module area. The Peralta team verbally advised that fewer WAPs would be needed than originally specified in the RFP. New requirement would be 2 WAPs. Please confirm reduction / change in scope. 2 WAPs will be deployed to the Security Office. This does not change the overall number of WAPs specified for the District Office site.
Posted: 9/8/2021
Question: Dear Peralta, Please advise on the following items discussed on the walk that may be divergencies, changes, additions and/or modifications to the RFP with respect to College of Alameda: C#1: Mechanical Room. The COA / Peralta team verbally discussed modifying / changing the number of drops in the mechanical room. 12 total drops. Please confirm any modifications to scope. C#2 Bookstore. The COA / Peralta team verbally discussed adding additional drops to cover the required devices. Increase drops to 20 (from 12) for a net gain of 8 drops. Please confirm added scope.
Response: C#1: Mechanical Room. This change is correct, 12 drops. C#2 Bookstore. This change is correct, 20 drops
Posted: 9/8/2021
Question: Would you elaborate on why this project is not subject to the District's Project Labor Agreement? We would have to evaluate the possible effects on the construction site environment.
Response: The PLA agreement has expired and the District does not have a current agreement.
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: For the District Office, it is mentioned that "20+" UPS's are needed. Can you please provide an exact number.
Response: District Office will require 22 UPS units. This will be reflected in the addendum.
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: How many patch cords are needed for each site, and please break these down by size in feet.
Response: We have already responded to this question. Please see the public solicitation.
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: For the patch cords, the RFP stipulates Cat6A, even tough the cable standard for these runs is Cat6. Can we therefore use Cat6 patch cords, instead of Cat6A?
Response: Please use Cat6A not Cat6.
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: We did not walk the Foundation portables at the District office. The RFP stipulates 64 drops. Can you confirm that this is the correct amount?
Response: Confirming 64 drops between the Foundation portables. This area was toured. These cables will be terminated in Purchasing’s MDF room with a new 19” universal rack.
Posted: 9/13/2021
Question: We did not walk or view the Fire Alarm panel at the District Office. RFP calls for 12 drops. Can you confirm please?
Response: Confirming 12 drops at the Security Office for the Fire Alarm Panel. This area was toured. New cables and a patch panel will be installed onto the existing rack. This project will not involve configuring or connecting to the Fire Alarm panel. (see RFP page 77)
Posted: 9/14/2021
Question: For outdoor WAPs that will require a lift, does the District have lifts that can be used (and if so, what types), or will lift rentals need to be factored into the bid?
Response: Lifts should be factored into the bid.
Posted: 9/15/2021
Question: Dear Peralta team, Without an addendum, we are unable to solidify pricing and/or pricing from our SLEB contractors. Given that the addendum has still not been released, we would like to request additional time once the Addendum is released to review it, and potential have additional questions. The October 1, 2021 date for submission may not allow sufficient time to do this.
Response: We have already responded to this question. Please see the public solicitation.
Posted: 9/17/2021
Question: Dear Peralta Team, for clarification, can you confirm that all new copper category cable will be 6A. Thank you.
Response: Yes, all new copper category cable will be CAT6A.