Attch_13_A0002_Questions_Answers_0002.pdf

CONSTRUCTION HAZMAT & AML RESPONSE

Solicitation No: 140L0624R0010 – Amendment 0002 Questions & Answers

Form 1510-56

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

REFERENCE | SECTION QUESTIONS | ANSWERS

Amend 0001 L0624R0010 HAZMAT 1442 Cont. Pages,

pp. 47-48

Q1: Due to the disruption caused by the COVID pandemic, would the

Government consider extending the past performance recency definition to 7 years?

A1: No.

A0001 Price Schedule

Q2: I noticed that the embedded link in Attachment 2 for the pricing sheet is not working. Can you please send another link, or document, with the pricing sheet?

A2: See Attachments: “Attch 11_A0001 Price Schedule”.

In the document Sol_140L0624R0010.pdf, page 44, L-7

Volume 1: Required Documentation (d) Bonding

Capacity, Amend 0001 L0624R0010 HAZMAT 1442 Cont. Pages, p.

Q3: We respectfully request the government remove this requirement based upon the unawardable sample task order being located at a fictional ABC Mine site located near Anywhere, Western, U.S. The purpose of a bid bond is to ensure a contractor fulfills its obligations on a project and provides financial and legal recourse to the owner of a project. Since this is a fictitious project, there is no need to provide the owner with a financial and legal means to hold a contractor to its bid obligation.

A3: The Government agrees, bid bonds for the sample task order are not required. However, bonding capacity is required to be provided by the offeror’s surety.

In the document Sol_140L0624R0010.pdf, page 45, L-9

Volume 3: Factor II, Past Performance (d)

Questionnaires.

Q4: Will the government allow the use of previously completed Past

Performance Questionnaires? It is often difficult to (and places an undue burden

on) have government clients repeatedly complete performance questionnaires on the same project.

A4: Yes; references, not the offeror, may email previously completed questionnaires. See revision on clarification on CPARS.

In the document Sol_140L0624R0010.pdf, page 45, L-9

Volume 3: Factor II, Past Performance h)

Q5: We respectfully request the government allow CPARS to be submitted in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires and in addition to FAPIIS reports.

A5: See above response and revised L-9(h).

In the document Sol_140L0624R0010.pdf, page 45, L-10

Volume 4: Factor III, Price (b) Limitations on

Subcontracting Worksheet.

Q6: Please confirm that the government wants the offeror to complete the

Limitations on Subcontracting Worksheet as it would apply to the sample task order. If not, please identify how the offeror should propose to complete total amounts, and identified subcontractors for indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity task order opportunities.

A6: This does not apply at the sample task order level. Limitations on

Subcontracting applies at the IDIQ level. See H-25.

General

Q7: May an acronym list be included in the volumes and be excluded from the page count?

A7: Yes.

Volume 2 – Technical Approach/Capabilities/Sample

Task Order Information and Attachment 3 – Sample Task

Order Statement of Work.

Q8: Please confirm that resumes are not required to be submitted in the proposal.

A8: Please do not submit resumes for the Sample Task Order. Resumes will be required for subsequent task orders under the IDIQ.

Volume III – Past Performance.

Amend 0001 L0624R0010 HAZMAT 1442 Cont. Pages,

pp. 47-48

Q9: Will the government allow for past performance references within the last five years?

A9: Yes; see revisions.

N/A

Q10: Can a Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) be substituted for a Certified

Safety Professional (CSP)?

A10: Yes.

N/A

Q11: Is the expected Quality Assurance Plan to be in the form of the Uniform

Federal Policy (UFP) Quality Assurance Project Plan?

A11: No.

Sample Task Order, Statement of Work section 2.3, second paragraph, first sentence references “single lined repository”.

Q12: Should this be interpreted as a ‘single, lined repository’ or a “single-lined repository”? What is the BLMs expectation for the liner material?

A12: Single-lined repository. The liner is assumed to be compacted natural material found at the site (e.g., clay).

N/A

Q13: The Solicitation and Statement of Work infers the potential for emergency response capability, however, does not specify what emergency response capability is required. See Solicitation Section B and Statement of Work Section

7.3. Are offerors required to have an emergency response capability? If yes what type of emergency response scenarios are envisioned and do offerors need to demonstrate experience with emergency response activities?

A13: Offerors should expect to have some (contractor caused) emergency response (Contractor caused) capabilities during the execution of a task order.

N/A

Q14: Given that November 11, 2024, is a federal holiday, could the due date be extended to November 12, 2024?

A14: Due date has been extended to November 25, 2PM MT.

L-8 Volume2: Factor 1 b) A plan to respond to an emergency when a hazardous substance release is identified or suspected at the worksite.

Q15: Please provide more context for the response. Are offerors supposed to respond with capabilities to respond to emergency response across the AOR or respond with our plan to respond to a site-specific hazardous substance release that we caused at a site we are currently working at?

A15: Contractors should have a plan for release on the worksite, in the event of a release caused by the contractor during execution of the task order. The plan shall address emergency response across the AOR, not for an incident caused by the awardee on a current awarded task order.

Sections L-8, M-4, and Statement of Work Section 3

Q16: RFP Section L-8 a) and Section M-4 a) require a plan demonstrating capability to perform work in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, Utah and Wyoming.

Section 3 of the Statement of Work, however, states “Project sites will mainly be in the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, Utah, and

Wyoming. Please confirm that North Dakota and South Dakota are primary states covered under this contract where work may be performed.

A16: Yes; North Dakota and South Dakota are primary states covered under this contract.

Section L-6(e) and L-8 d)

Q17: Regarding the 25-page limit for Volume 2, Technical

Approach/Capabilities/Sample Task Order Information, would the BLM please exclude the sample task order schedule (required in Section L-8 paragraph d) from the page limit for Volume 2? This will allow offerors a few additional pages to more completely address the other requirements in this volume.

A17: No Yes; offerors must provide a sample task order schedule, which may be excluded from the 25-page limit.

Section J, Page 31 of 48

Q18: The List of Attachments (#4) references “Sample Task Order Wage

Determination”. It is clear that this Wage Decision is to be used for the sample project, but is it also to be used for the IDIQ Proposal labor pricing?

A18: The sample Wage Determination has been removed.

Reference: Solicitation - Cover Pages

Q19: The solicitation indicates that the Cover Letter must include the Prime

Contractor's Dun & Bradstreet number (DUNS), however as of April 4, 2022, the federal government stopped using Dun & Bradstreet numbers (DUNS). Should

Offerors include their CAGE Code instead of their DUNS?

A19: No; offerors must submit a DUNS number for the Government to obtain a

Dun & Bradstreet report on the reliability and financial stabilities of companies.

Reference: Attch 3_Sample Task Order SOW - 4.2 Key

Personnel

Q20: Are Resumes required as part of the Sample TO Narrative response?

A20: No.

Reference: Attch 3_Sample Task Order SOW - 4.2 Key

Personnel

Q21: If Resumes are required as part of the Sample TO Narrative response, are they included in the 25-page Volume 2-page limit?

A21: No.

Reference: L-9 Vol 3: Factor II Past Performance (a)

References

Q22: For a two -party 8(a) joint venture, please clarify that references

(experience) from either party are acceptable.

A22: The Government requires references from both businesses.

L-9 Vol 3: Factor II Past Performance (a) References

Q23: Please clarify whether references (experience) from subcontractors are acceptable.

A23: No; the Government is assessing the past performance of the prime contractor.

L-9 Vol 3: Factor II Past Performance (d) Questionnaires

Q24: Often questionnaires returned directly to agency representatives via email are, in our experience, lost or otherwise not evaluated. Please consider allowing offerors to submit PPQ forms with the proposal as other agencies now do. These forms include detailed contact information that would allow you to follow up with a reference if needed.

A24: Please submit PPQs as instructed in the Solicitation.

L-9 Vol 3: Factor II Past Performance (d) Questionnaires Q25: If PPQs are permitted to accompany the proposal, assuming they should be included in Volume 3 - Past Performance, please confirm the PPQs will not be included in the 10-page volume page count.

A25: PPQs are not permitted to accompany the proposal.

Attch 3_Sample Task Order SOW - 4.2 Key Personnel

Q26: The Sample Task Order SOW requires that the Construction Manager has seven (7) years of experience and a bachelor’s degree. Will additional years of experience be considered in lieu of the education requirement for the proposed

Construction Manager?

A26: Yes, additional years of experience may be acceptable in lieu of the bachelor’s degree.

Solicitation Section L-6 (b) and Attachment 2

Q27: Attachment 2 - Price Schedule states that the completed Price Schedule should be submitted to the Government as Adobe PDF and Excel files. Please confirm whether the Government would also like native files (Excel, MS Project, etc.) for the Sample Task Order Pricing (Attachment 5) and the Sample Task

Order Schedule (see Solicitation Section L-9(d)). Please confirm that any requirements for native files will be accepted in addition to the four 'individual file(s)' for each factor/volume as referenced in Solicitation Section L-6(b).

A27: Native files are not necessary for the sample task order but will be accepted as specified by the Government in future task orders.

Solicitation Section L-6 (c)

Q28: Please confirm that 11x17 pages with color charts, photos, tables, and diagrams shall be counted as one page.

A28: Yes.

Attachment 3, Sample Task Order (TO) Scope of Work

(SOW)

Q29: Section 4.2 states "The Contractor shall provide the resumes of key management and technical personnel that will execute the work that may be awarded under this contract." Please confirm that this is just a standard sample

SOW inclusion and that contractors are not required to submit resumes as part of the Sample TO Technical Approach; and that instead, recommended roles and responsibilities (See Solicitation L-8 (c) iii) pertinent to the Sample TO should be discussed in narrative format.

A29: Yes.

Solicitation Section L-8

Q30: Given that Volume 2 must contain 2 plans, a robust technical approach for the Sample TO (to include all elements described in L-8 (c) i-x, and a schedule -would the Government please consider excluding the project schedule from the page limitations.

If the schedule cannot be excluded from the page limitations, would the

Government please consider increasing the page limitation for Volume II from

25 pages to 30 pages?

A30: Yes; the schedule can be excluded from the 25-page limitation.

Solicitation Section M-2 (b)(3)(i)

Q31: Please confirm that projects more than 90% complete will be considered

‘significantly complete’ as referenced in M-2 (b)(3)(i), "Recent is defined as a project completed or significantly completed within three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation."

A31: Yes.

Attachment 3, Sample TO SOW Q32: It is the Offeror’s understanding that while Uranium may be present in the mine tailings, radiation levels on-site would not require radiological monitoring/personnel. Please confirm that Contractors are not required to consider the potential of radiological activity in the mine tailings. Such consideration would result in a significant increase in cost, putting the total TO cost above the $1M - $5M range indicated in the solicitation.

A32: Contractors are required to consider the potential of radioactivity in the mine tailings.

Attachment 2, Price Schedule

Q33: The Labor Categories presented in Attachment 2 - Price Schedule do not include a Radiation Safety Officer or Certified Industrial Hygienist. Given the likelihood of radiological contamination within Uranium mine tailings, is this an oversight, or should we assume the duties typically associated with these positions will not be required under the contract?

A33: This contract may require the services of a Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) and/or Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH). Since the Price Schedule cannot include all labor categories, it is assumed that the Contractor would use comparable labor categories for personnel not listed. For example, the RSO or

CIH may have an hourly rate similar to a Senior Engineer.

Solicitation Section L-10

Q34: Section L Volume 4 Factor III states that Sample task order pricing shall be based on offeror’s entries for the IDIQ price Schedule. The referenced Section B states that Labor Rates shall be in compliance with Davis-Bacon Wage

Determinations for the applicable state in which the work is executed. The

Davis-Bacon Wage Determination provided for the sample problem is for the state of Washington.

For the IDIQ Price Schedule Labor Rates dictated by Davis-Bacon WD’s (i.e.

Operator, Laborer, Truck Driver and other Craft Labor) how should the subcontractor apply a rate based on the drastic variations of Davis-Bacon WD’s across the different states.

If we are to use the IDIQ Price Schedule to build the Sample Task Order, do we change the Craft Labor rates to indicate the state of Washington Davis-Bacon

WD’s which may not be consistent with the IDIQ Price Schedule??

A34: The wage determination has been removed.

Attachment 2, Price Schedule

Q35: The first tab of the Section B IDIQ Price Schedule - Notes states that

Labor, Equipment and Material breakdowns shall be provided for each subcontractor. Please confirm whether the Government wants one Price Schedule for the contract to be submitted or if they want Price Schedules from the Prime

Contractor and all team members.

A35: Please submit one price schedule for this contract. For future task orders, please submit all labor, equipment, and material breakdowns, including subcontractors.

Attachment 2, Price Schedule

Q36: The first tab of the Section B IDIQ Price Schedule - Notes states that

Labor, Equipment and Material breakdowns shall be provided for each subcontractor. There is no tab for Material in the Price Schedule linked in

Attachment 2. Please advise whether Government it is required and provide an updated Price Schedule if needed.

A36: Prices for materials are not required on Attachment 2, Price Schedule;

however, for future Task Order proposals, the Offeror and its subcontractor will be expected to provide a breakdown of all costs, including prices for materials, as appropriate.

Solicitation Section L-8 Q37: L-8 Volume 2B on Page 44 of the Solicitation refers to ‘a plan to respond to an emergency when a hazardous substance is identified or suspected at the worksite’.

GENERAL QUESTION: Neither the Overall Contract Scope of Work or Sample

Task Scope of Work specifically address any Emergency Response requirements or services, yet it is an important evaluation subfactor under Factor 1, Technical

Approach/Capabilities. Are Emergency Response capabilities required for releases only related to ongoing work being performed by the prime contractor or are more global capabilities desired across the 14-State service area of the contract on an as-needed basis under specific timelines.

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS: In regard to ‘a plan’, is the Agency requesting response times for emergency response contractor to various locations within the western contiguous United States?

Does the Agency request the level of staffing available, and locations of staff located in the western contiguous United States?

What is the capacity that the Agency is requesting for the plan? i.e., capabilities of the ER contractor; response for cleanup and disposal; capabilities for characterization and hazardous determination?

An identified ‘plan’ for response to a hazardous substance will be dependent on the nature of the material (i.e., subsurface impacts from historical operations or breach of a tank etc., requiring immediate response). Regarding our response, would the Agency like a general overview of services, or an example plan for multiple types of responses? Evaluation criteria identified in: M-4 Volume 2B on

Page 47 of the Solicitation.

A37: Contractors will be required to plan for and perform emergency response activities during the execution of task orders in which they are engaged with the

Government. Typically, the potential response would be addressed in a Health and Safety plan at the task order level.

Attachment 3, Sample TO SOW

Q38: Please confirm whether the sample TO is anticipated to become an actual task order requirement under the upcoming ID/IQ.

A38: No; it will not.

Attachment 3, Sample TO SOW

Q39: The Sample Task Order SOW references Contaminants of Concern to include waste tailings, with high concentrations of heavy metals, primarily lead, arsenic, selenium, and uranium. The document makes no reference to radiological concerns typically associated with Uranium mine waste remediation.

Should Offerors assume radiological controls are not required during field activities?

Reference: Section A

Given the nature of the questions submitted, the Offeror respectfully requests sufficient additional time to prepare and high-quality and compliant proposal after the receipt of answers. Would the Government consider extending the proposal due date to 3 weeks after the receipt of answers to submitted RFIs?

A39: Due to the potential presence of uranium, thorium, and radium in the mine tailings, Offerors should assume radiological controls are required during field activities.

Answer 23 Q40: This is a significant change to teaming arrangements this late in solicitation process. Additionally, this acquisition is being procured under NAICS 237990 which allows subcontractors to perform up to 85% of the work under the contract. In accordance with FAR 15.305(2)(iii) we believe this meets the definition of “major or critical aspects of the requirement” and therefore the government should consider past performance from subcontractors. We respectfully request the government reconsider allowing subcontractor experience to be included in the proposal as submissions for the Project

References as described in the Solicitation L-9(a).

FAR 13.305(2)(iii) “The evaluation should take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition.”

A40: Subcontractor experience submissions will not be evaluated in lieu of the prime contractor’s past performance. Under this contract, the Government is allowing the prime to select appropriate subcontractors for the work at the task order level. Therefore, the Government is not including a provision that will prohibit removal or addition of subcontractors only with the contracting officer’s approval.

Please note that FAR Part 13 governs Simplified Acquisition Procedures and has no relevance to the requirement at issue.

N/A

Q41: Can BLM please confirm that a minimum of 1 project description is the required from each joint venture partner?

A41: Offerors may submit past performance references for each joint venture partner.

RFP Amendment 1 L-9 Volume 3 sub h

Q42: For past performance references on Federal projects, the Government has access to and utilizes completed Contract Performance Assessment Reports

(CPARS), therefore, past performance submissions by offerors shall not include any contracts for which a completed CPARS has been accomplished.

Interpretation of this statement is that a contractor shall not submit past performance references (project experience) for contracts that have completed

CPARs. Please confirm our understanding of this statement.

If this interpretation is correct then the government is potentially limiting past performance references to contracts (project experience) that do not have a completed CPARs evaluation, which may exclude contractors from submitting recent and relevant projects, as those projects all have associated completed

CPARS.

A42: The interpretation above is incorrect. To avoid duplications, offerors shall not submit CPARS the Government already has access to.