Amendment 2 Attachment 3 Questions and Answers - Final.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 28 KB Posted
- Attached to
- AMENDMENT 0005: Reactor Recovery Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 1333ND25RNB610012
About this file
This document is a Questions and Answers file containing 47 questions and responses related to RFP No. 1333ND25RNB610012 for Reactor Recovery Services at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Key details from the Q&A include: proposal deadline extended to February 28, 2025 at 5:00PM ET; second round of questions due by February 17, 2025 at 12:00PM ET; site visit scheduled for February 12 from 12-2pm; work to be performed Monday-Friday 7:00AM to 5:00PM; period of performance estimated to begin April 1, 2025; 30% small business goal required as percentage of total contract value can be achieved cumulatively over 4-year contract period; mock task order includes replacement of fuel transfer dropout chute components, piping, valves, and pneumatic actuators; NIST will provide HP physics support, scaffolding, and workspace for fabrication activities; contractor responsible for design engineering of new piping manifolds and must provide material traceability reports.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 37
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Questions for Gov.
| Question Number: | Question Source: (RFP, Attachment #, etc.) | Page Number and Paragraph Header from Source: | Question | Answer |
| 1 | RFP Section L | Para L.5, Deadline for Submittal of Proposals, page 65 | We respectfully request a two-week extension of the February 7, 2025, proposal submission deadline for RFP No. 1333ND25RNB610012, "Reactor Recovery Services", to be revised to be 2/21/25. This extension would enable us to do a complete review of all the documents that were provided in Amendment 1, to deliver a comprehensive and well-prepared response aligned with the solicitation requirements. | NIST can accommodate an extension, with a deadline of February 28, 2025 at 5:00PM ET. The solicitation has been updated accordingly. See section L.5. |
| 2 | RFP Section L | L.7.2. Case Studies for Technical/Management Capability and Experience page 66 | Is there a limit to the number of Case Studies that can be submitted? | No quantity limit, but please limit to nuclear experience. |
| 3 | RFP, Attachment 1 | Mock Task Order, Statement of Work, page 74 | Would this mock task order be considered a specific task order for this contract? With the detail provided, this appears to be a Seed Project? | This is a mock task order that is not currently funded; however, it could become a task order after award. |
| 4 | RFP Section L | Will there be an opportunity for a site visit? | Yes, NIST will accommodate a site visit on February 12, from 12-2pm. The solicitation has been updated accordingly. See Section L.4.2. | |
| 5 | RFP Section B, Section C, Attachment 1 | Para B.2.1 - Health Physics personnel - Pg 4; Para 2.13 NIST HP support and Oversight pg 11, Para. 2.19.2 NIST provide Rad Worker training, page 14, Para 4.6 NIST HP specialist monitors and works along side… page 79.Para 9.6 HP Support including PPE, page 83. | There are a number of references to NIST Health Physics (HP's) personnel/scope. Is the govt going to provide all HP personnel for the execution of the work, or should the contractor provide pricing and scope for qualified HP's/Radiation Control Technicians (RCT's)? | NIST will provide HP physics support and oversight, but contractors are free to provide additional support if they choose |
| 6 | RFP Section C | Para 2.17 Worksite and Logistics |
The contractor must perform all
| work during NIST normal access hours 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM. Pg 12. | For estimating purposes, should we assume this is a Monday thru Friday schedule, no weekends or holidays? | Correct. The work performed under this contract shall be scheduled Monday through Friday, with no work weekends or days designated as Federal holidays. | |||
| 7 | RFP Section I | Section I Contract Clauses, pg 27 | Changes Clause 52.243-1 Changes Fixed Price is not included in Section I. Is it the government's intent to add this to the IDIQ contract will this be added in the first task order? | No, 52.243-1 Changes Fixed Price is not included. Clause 52.212-4 is in the solicitaition. Any changes will reference 52.212-4(c) as its authority. | |
| 8 | RFP Section L | Para L.11 Small Business Contracting Plan. | Can the Small Business goal of 30% be obtained cumulatively through the duration of the contracting period of 4 years or is the goal of 30% for each task order? Second Question - is the SB Goal a percentage of all subcontracts, or is it a percentage of total contract value? | The Small Business Goal of 30% can be obtained cumulatively throughout the duration of the four year contract. The SB Goal is a percentage of total contract value. | |
| 9 | RFP Section C | Para 2.8 Testing and Inspections. Para 2.8.1 The contractor is responsible for the completeness of the tests that are required to |
achieve the QA in line with the requirements of this specification. The contractor must prepare a QA plan and submit it to the NCNR for approval. Does the QA Plan called for, in Section 2.8.1 of the RFP, need to comply with a specific regulation (e.g. NQA-1)? Inspection and tests per component will be dictated by their designated code of construction (i.e. ASME VIII, B31.1, or other defined code). The contractor should submit a QA plan on how they will incorporate all requirements from the defined code of construction to verify that the components supplied meet all requirements. For example, the code of construction will determine requirements for materials, design, fabrication, inspection, tests, and various other requirements, as applicable.
For our reactor, we are designed primarily to ASME Boiler Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII (rules for construction of pressure vessels) and ASME B31.1 (Power Piping).
Attachment 1 to this amendment, which is from Chapter 3 of our SAR, defines codes of construction we use based on component classification (i.e. piping vs vessels). Please note that in the initial Task Order documents NIST provided, there was a mistaken code mentioned for piping. Our piping is code is ASME B31.1.
To answer the NQA-1 question, no NQA-1 requirements are required for our reactor. NQA-1 is applicable if the code of construction is ASME Boiler Pressure Vessel Code, Section III. Our plant pre-dates ASME BPVC Section III.
| 10 | RFP Section M | Factor 4. …submittal materials…. Required for technical and management approach, pg 73 | Does a copy of the QA Plan need to be included in the Mock Task Order response? | Yes, please reference the Mock Task SOW. | |
| 11 | RFP Amendment 1 | Attachments and documents | Will NIST provide a copy of the latest revision of Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for the NBSR? It was not provided in Amendment 1. | This can be provided. Please reference Attachment 2 (multiple) to this amendment. | |
| 12 | RFP Section L | Para L.8 Volume III Business/Price Proposal item (2) Mock Task Order Specific, pg 68 | Per L.8 Volume III Business/Price Proposal item (2) Mock Task Order Specific, the section references completed section B.2.2 and B.2.3. B.2.3 is not provided. | See answer to Question 25 below. | |
| 13 | RFP Section C | Para 2.4 General Requirements, pg 9 | Per 2.4 General Requirements, section 2.4.3 states "If a release level cannot be reached, the equipment may be forfeited as radiological waste." Please clarify if equipment is forfeited is the contractor entitled to an equitable adjustment. | If equipment is to be forfeited, the contractor and the government will come to a consensus on whether an equitable adjustment is warranted. | |
| 14 | RFP Section B | Para B.2.1 CONTRACT LINE ITEM NUMBERS (CLIN) PRICING STRUCTURE FOR | |||
| ID/IQ Pg 4 | In developing rates for IDIQ CLINs, should this be based on fiscal year or is there an award date that should be used as the start of the period of performance? | When developing rates for the IDIQ CLINs, please use a one-year period beginning on around Date of Award (DOA). For estimating purposes, DOA can begin April 1, 2025 - March 30, 2026, but will change based on actual award date. | |||
| 15 | RFP Section L | Para L.8, sub para (d) 2- Mock Task Order Specific | What is the start date of the Mock Task Order for pricing basis? | The contractor may use April 1, 2025 as the date for the Mock Task Order to begin. Please remember that this is a "mock task order" only. | |
| 16 | General | General | Can provision be made for a site walk-down on January 28th with respect to portions of the facility related to the mock task order (Reactor Fuel Transfer System Upgrade)? | See answer to Question 4. | |
| 17 | General | General | Can the deadline for questions by extended by one week following the walk-down (e.g., February 4th)? | See answer to Question 1. | |
| 18 | General | General | Can the proposal due date be extended by 3 weeks following the walkdown (e.g., February 25th)? This period is necessary to incorporate information gained from the walkdown, and answers to subsequent questions, when developing an execution plan for the mock task order. | See answer to Question 1. | |
| 19 | RFP Section J, Attachment 2 | Page 92-93: Past Experience/Past Performance Reference Information Form | Could NIST confirm if Attachment 2 is intended exclusively for Volume II (Past Performance Proposal), or are we expected to use it in other volumes, such as Volume I (Case Studies for Technical/Management Capability) or Volume II (Mock Task Order)? Additionally, if Attachment 2 is used across multiple volumes, how should offerors ensure consistency while meeting the objectives of each section? | Attachment 2 is only for Past Performance/Volume II. | |
| 20 | RFP Section L | Page 66: Section L.7.2 and L.7.3 Case studies and Past Performance Proposal | Could NIST clarify how we should present case studies in Volume I to emphasize technical/management expertise without duplicating the intent of Volume II's past performance? | Volume II (past performance) should include rating and evaluations of the past work (experience) | |
| 21 | RFP Section L | p.66: Section L.7.3.4 Mock Task Order | Could NIST clarify how the evaluation of the Mock Task Order is related to or complements the evaluations of past performance (Volume II) and case studies (Volume I)? Are there specific expectations for how we should address technical and management capabilities in the Mock Task Order in connection with the other volumes? | The contractor should demonstrate its experience working on piping for a nuclear reactor. | |
| 22 | General | General | Would NIST extend the due date for the proposal to March 7 to allow time for obtaining supply-chain quotes to accurately respond to the RFP? | See Answer to Question 1. | |
| 23 | General | General | If the due date for the proposal is extended, would you consider allowing a second round of questions? | Yes. The second round of questions will be due no later than February 17, 2025 at 12:00PM ET. The solicitation has been updated accordingly. See Section L.4.1. | |
| 24 | RFP | B.2.1 | For Section B.2.1, can NIST change the request to allow rates based on calendar year instead of in 12-month segments from the time of award? | No, NIST needs rates to coincide with the period of performance. See answer to Question 14 for further information. | |
| 25 | RFP | Section L.8(d)(2) | Section L.8(d)(2) Mock Task Order Specific requires that Sections B.2.2 and B.2.3 be completed. We think that these sections should be B.2.1 and B.2.2 instead. Please confirm. | Amendment 2 has updated Solicitation Section L.8.(d)(2) to read B.2.2 only. | |
| 26 | RFP | Page 1 | Will NIST erect the required approved scaffolding and certify identified in NIST ECN-1003 (page 1) for use by the contractor to access FTV-1 and FTV-2? | Yes. NIST will erect and certify the required scaffolding. Scaffolding was designed to allow valve access, but it may hinder removing and installing the dropout chute | |
| 27 | RFP | General | Are there any special lifting and/or rigging equipment and/or rigging points located within the Sub Pile room for use on FTV-1 valve/actuator and FTV-2 valve/actuator? | Yes, there is existing piping, some ceiling anchors, and crossbeams. | |
| 28 | RFP | General | Will NIST perform the final setpoint on the valves/operators per NIST approved procedure(s) by licensed operators? | Additional clarification is needed on this question. Please submit this question again in the Round Two portion of Q&A. | |
| 29 | RFP | Kiteworks Attachments | Please provide additional information: operating procedure, etc., for use of the holding tool (Sub-Pile Room) drawing D30.033. | Please disregard this drawing, as a holding tool is no longer used. Piping should be like-for-like to the existing. | |
| 30 | RFP | Kiteworks Attachments | Will NIST be responsible for the removal and replacement of the lead blocks strapped around the drop chute; see photograph DSC00485.jpg? | The contractor will be responsible to remove and stack in sub-pile room | |
| 31 | RFP | Kiteworks Attachments | There are a number of electrical connection conduit boxes without cover and exposed wire connections (examples: pictures IMG0283.jpg and IMG0292.jpg) that may have been taken during testing/troubleshooting operations. Are these wires associated with the FTV 1,2 & 3 operations and correcting to electrical code part of the work scope? | This is not part of the scope. | |
| 32 | RFP | Section C, Item 2.2.1 | Statement: RFP Section C, Item 2.2.1 “Replacement of fuel transfer dropout chute” and 1st sub-bullet states; “Replace pipe sections, fuel transfer valves, pneumatic actuators, wiring, etc.” Please provide clarification on above work scope statement to better understand the total work scope: i. Only components (piping, expansion joints, pneumatic actuators between/including FTV-1 (Elevation 417-7”) and FTV-3 (Elevation 405-4”)?; and ii. Only electrical wiring from the pneumatic actuator micro switches to a junction box? | Only components (piping, expansion joints, pneumatic actuators between/including FTV-1 (Elevation 417-7”) and FTV-3 (Elevation 405-4”).; and ii. Only electrical wiring from the pneumatic actuator micro switches to a junction box. | |
| 33 | RFP | General | Please specify the safety class of the valves, actuators, bellows, and bolting to be supplied (safety/Non-safety/ Commercial grade-Augmented Quality). | Must comply with ASTM B31.3 | |
| 34 | RFP | General | Please specify the period of performance expected for the mock task order, i.e., the approximate date range. | See answer to Question 15. | |
| 35 | RFP Section L, M | pp's 64-74, Section L and Section M | Throughout the instructions in Section L, and Section M, specifically for technical and management approach, as well as case studies and past performance, the term "offeror" is use. Please confirm the definition of offeror includes subsidiaries and affiliates of the named offeror. | The term offeror means the prime contractor. This does not include any subcontractors. | |
| 36 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 11 (SOW) and pp 83 (Mock Task Order attachment) | Government furnished support includes "limited storage for the contractor provided equipment" and "access to NIST and the work area during scheduled reactor shutdowns". Can NIST clarify whether office space will be made available for use by the offeror/contractor for its management and craft personnel for the performance of specific task order work? | NIST can provide workspace to accommodate task order work. | |
| 37 | RFP Section C | General | Other than the requirement for a Radioactive Material License, for conducting work at the site, does NIST require or will provide any construction, building, planning, or environmental permits? | NIST will provide lock out/tag out and burn permits as needed | |
| 38 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | Various | What is the expected NIST review and approval cycle for the Plans (e.g. Project, Engineering, Fabrication, QA, Safety, Maintenance) after submittal from the Offeror/Contractor? | The expected review and approval cycle is 2 weeks. | |
| 39 | Section I, Contract Clauses | General | The RFP Section I, Contract Clauses does not include FAR 52.222-6 Construction Wage Rate Requirements. Does this contract fall under the Davis Bacon Act? | No, this contract does not fall under the Davis Bacon Act. | |
| 40 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 83, para 7.0 Government Responsibilities | Please confirm that the contractor will be given space on-site to perform pre-fabrication and fabrication activities with permanent or temporary power capable of supporting 480V welding activities | Yes, the contractor will be given space on-site to perform pre-fabrication and fabrication activities with permanent or temporary power capable of supporting 480V welding activities. | |
| 41 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 83, para 7.0 Government Responsibilities; 9.4 / 9.6 | Will the cubicle work area be decontaminated prior to the contractor activities beginning? | No, the cubicle work area will not be decontaminated prior to the contractor activities beginning. | |
| 42 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 77, para 4.0 Technical Services Requirements | Are the piping and valves to be considered safety related components/materials? If so, what safety class are these considered to be? | No, the piping and valves are not to be considered safety related components/materials. | |
| 43 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 77, para 4.0 Technical Services Requirements 4.8 Wiring Replacement | Will the contractor be able to use existing penetrations for new cable and conduit installations? | Yes, the contractor will be able to use existing penetrations for new cable and conduit installations. | |
| 44 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 79, 4.6 Pipe sections and fittings | Is the contractor responsible for design engineering of the new piping manifolds, described on page 79 of the Statement of Work, Mock Task Order? If so, will NIST provide the appropriate documentation that details the process for facility change control and configuration management control? | Yes, the contractor is responsible for design engineering of the new piping manifolds, described on page 79 of the Statement of Work, Mock Task Order. Yes, NIST will provide the appropriate documentation that details the process for facility change control and configuration management control. | |
| 45 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 77, para 4.0 Technical Services Requirements | Are material traceability reports required for the new piping and valve components of the Mock Task Order? | Yes, material traceability reports are required for the new piping and valve components of the Mock Task Order. | |
| 46 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 77, 4.2 Fuel Transfer Valves & Pneumatic Actuators | Is the contractor responsible for testing of new FTV's? If yes, will a specification be provided for the testing by NIST? | Testing would be part of acceptance. NIST would perform the test per NIST specifications. | |
| 47 | RFP, Section C (SOW) & Attachment 1 | pp 80, Section 4.8.6 | Do the existing conduit runs provide for the required SOW power and signal separation conditions? If no, are new block house penetrations required? | Only signal wiring is being replaced. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .