B09_-_140E0123R0001_IDIQ_RFP_TA_Decom__-_Amendment_6_-_Questions_and_Answers_12_09_22_0006.pdf

TA Decommissioning Services on the OCS Solicitation 140E0123R0001, Amendment 6, Issued 12/9/22

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Where is the information for High Island and West Delta?

Answer: Information for High Island and West Delta is located on the Hard Media DVD. Additional information about both lease facilities will be provided on at the task order level.

2. We would very much like the opportunity to discuss alternatives to the issued RFP, as it is unlikely that our tender board will grant approval as proposed. As such, we would like an opportunity to better understand BSEE’s potential constraints and offer alternatives that we believe would reduce overall decommissioning cost and risk and make this partnership possible. Would you be available next week a short teams call to discuss?

Answer: We cannot meet with firms individually during solicitation. BSEE will allow for firms to submit proposals for alternate decommissioning methods for our consideration. It is not mandatory that the government award the seed task order for Matagorda Island. In order to establish an IDIQ, the seed Task order is also used to establish technical acceptability and determine if pricing is fair and reasonable.

3. Partial well decommissioning does not diminish the environmental and economic risk in the case of a platform failure during a storm/collision which would require subsea access. Additionally, we may not be able to provide a warranty if only zonal isolations are performed in the case that pressure or bubbles occur from a partial TA. Furthermore, expanding the scope for similar orphaned wells reduces the overall costs particularly mob costs.

Answer:

A) The government agrees with the initial statement; however, our intent is to install a down hole permanent barrier to reduce the risk of uncontrolled hydrocarbon flow. BSEE can only perform contract work to the extent funding is available.

B) BSEE’s anticipates, at a minimum, that the contractor will complete zonal isolation and achieve successful barrier integrity testing. If successful zonal isolation is achieved, BSEE agrees that the contractor would not be responsible if pressure or bubbles occur after demobilization.

C) BSEE agrees that expanding the scope reduces overall costs. During decommissioning activities, should the contractor determine, that full plugging can be achieved, and funding is available, the work can be added to the scope via a change order.

4. Articles in the RFP, present unmitigable risk to the contractor responsible for complying with 30 CFR $ 250

Subpart Q.

C.3.A. Platform 'Make Safe', page 11 of 126, "BSEE does not warrant the condition of any platform, and the contractor shall board at its own risk."

C3.C: Well Decommissioning, page 12 of 126, refers to the following sections of the 30 CFR $ 250 Subpart Q, Decommissioning Activities. "The contractor is wholly responsible for meeting all requirements and ensuring that all decommissioning operations are completed without defect."

Section J, Attachment 6, 3.3 Partial Well Decommissioning, Page 58 of 126. This definition is not an option presented in the regulation. Based on BSEE's overall intent of Decommissioning Orphaned Wells, the only option to comply with 30 CFR Part 250 Subpart Q is to proceed with the Permanently Plugging Well explained in sections 250.1710 to 250.1716.

We remain interested in partnering with BSEE to provide a safe, efficient, and environmentally responsible decommissioning approach and may recommend a delegation as decommissioning operator to plan, design, and execute under limited liabilities.

May we request a meeting with yourself and Bryan Domangue to understand BSEE’s drivers/constraints and discuss how to best address BSEE’s objectives?

Answer: The Government Requested further clarification of the above question. The clarification and response is below.

It is our understanding that the “Operator” is responsible for the overall liability of the asset and any work that is performed on the asset. However, the question of accountability may arise if an undesirable event occurs during or after temporary abandonment.

For example: The wells are TA’ed in accordance with 30 CFR 250.1715 with the lower isolation plug. The platform is then toppled during a storm resulting in a leak from one of the wells. Is the contractor held responsible in this case or will BSEE as the Operator of Record assume the overall responsibility, giving the contractor limited liability to the work they performed?

Answer: For this example: BSEE’s anticipates, at a minimum, that the contractor will complete zonal isolation and achieve successful barrier integrity testing. If successful zonal isolation is achieved, BSEE agrees that the contractor would not be responsible if pressure, bubbles, or any damage that occurs as a result of an act of nature (i.e., storm) after demobilization. However, if damage occurs because of the contractor’s negligence (i.e., contractor’s vessel or equipment causes damage) the contractor is responsible for cost of repairs.

As it pertains to the articles in the RFP here is more clarification of the concern:

There may be a discrepancy between the RFP scope of temporary abandonment and the 30 CFR 250 references which address permanent plugging, and how this may affect a contractor’s liability

C.3.A BSEE as operator of record is responsible for the maintenance and operation of the platforms, hence, is quite relevant that any cost related to the "make safe" is to be paid to the contractor as a fixed price agreement. This is a concerning item due to the unknown conditions off the facilities and inability to accurately predict cost. Would be beneficial to have wording that allowed for a fixed cost estimate with approved time and material capacity from unknowns. We know from our ongoing decommissioning effort now that make safe cost can be challenging to estimate.

Answer: A Firm Fixed Price Proposal is not considered an estimate; it is a definitive cost. However, Amendment 6 will clarify the use of modifications to task orders on a time and material basis.

In addition, it is recommended that the contractor note any assumptions in their proposal submission, per RFP Section L instructions. An example of an assumption maybe, The Contractor’s FFP assumes that 15% of the Platforms have inoperable NAVAID Kits which require replacing. If the contractor discovers that more than 15% of the NAVAID kits need to be replaced, then the government would execute a time and materials modification to the contract for the additional work.

C.3.C Well Decommissioning: the regulation is not considering Temporary abandonment when future production is not foreseen. Should BSEE conciliate this discrepancy.

Answer: BSEE understands the discrepancy between the RFP and the regulations with regards to the term Temporary Abandon. For the purpose of this RFP, Temporary Abandon means the full plugging through the surface cement plug and testing requirements per 30 CFR per 250.1715.

5. How can we receive the Standard Bond Forms 25 and 25A (ref page 30 of the RFP)?

Answer: Payment and Performance Bond forms will be provided, from the Contracting Officer, with a copy of the executed Task Order Award. These forms can be found on the GSA Forms Library website at:

https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms.