Att 22 Q and A.pdf

Solicitation number 191BWC20R0002

Questions received 5/5/2020

1. Under Section M- Evaluation Factors for Award of the Solicitation, please clarify the requirements and the pages allowed for responding to Factor 1, specifically:

• The first two sentences request:

o Past performance of secondary wastewater treatment plant operations and maintenance service contract (s).

o Submit a maximum of one (1) page response per contract provided with a maximum of five (5) project examples for a total of five (5), one (1) page responses.

• Sub-item 1) then requests the following with no similar page count specified:

1) Provide a list of all current and past contracts for the same or substantially similar (same size and larger and complexity) work for the last three (3) years.

• The assumption is that that information to be provided in sub-item 1) will be considered in addition to the five pages specified for the requested "Past Performance" five reference projects.

o If this is correct, what is the page limit for the response to be provided for sub-item 1)?

We would request that a minimum of 10 additional pages be allowed for this response.

The intent was to limit the number of project examples to a maximum of 5 and to have a maximum 1-page response for each example. This is inclusive of subitem 1.

To be consistent with Factor 2 (maximum 10-page response), the maximum number of pages for Factor 1, Item 1 will be revised to a maximum 10 page response. The following text has been deleted and replaced as follows:

Submit a maximum of one (1) page response per contract provided with a maximum of five

(5) project examples for a total of five (5), one (1) page responses.

Submit a maximum ten (10) page response for Item 1).

2. With regard to the specified Font Type requirement specified under solicitation item L.04 - Proposal Composition Requirements and Instructions, would it be acceptable to use an equivalent type of font, such as Arial Narrow 12 Point, in place of Times New Roman for the response? Yes

Solicitation number 191BWC20R0002

Questions received 5/5/2020

1. We appreciate the need for security at the facility, and thus the ban on photo/video. Typically, photo documentation is an important tool for our operations and maintenance specialists to assess and record detailed information on the type and condition of equipment, including make/model, electricity use, Hp, and operating position (for example, on chemical feed pumps). We use this information to populate our in-house maintenance model, so that we can develop a thorough and accurate cost estimate and prioritize our maintenance program. In other cases, photo documentation can help us analyze chemical feed rates and determine opportunities for more efficient treatment and potential cost savings. In short – our team will take good notes in the field, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Can the IBWC take requested photos and make these available?

Photographs and recordings are not allowed at this facility, unless specifically required by the contract.

2. We understand that the IBWC seeks the highest value proposition for the operation of this important facility. Our goal is to bring a fresh perspective for managing your facilities, including innovative ideas to improve and enhance operations – safely and cost-effectively. To do that, our specialists need time on site to develop an understanding the system including existing challenges while identifying optimization opportunities. With that in mind, we ask the following:

a. Will IBWC consider a three-week extension of the proposal deadline? Notwithstanding the current pandemic, the short response time of the RFP is highly unusual in the industry when considering the size and complexity of your system. At times, we have noted that clients may be “rushed” to conclude their procurement because of looming deadline of the existing operator’s contract term. In those cases, clients have been successful in extending the current operator’s contract term for a short period (e.g. month-to-month or 3-month extension) to allow time for a successful procurement that provides them quality proposals to compare against status-quo

The close date of the solicitation will be changed from 29 May 2020 3:00 p.m. MDT to 11 June 2020 3:00 p.m. MST.

b. Most importantly, will a second site visit be offered, and when can that be scheduled? To submit a responsible proposal that delivers innovative ideas and opportunities for improvements, competitors need to become intimately familiar with all aspects of your operations. This requires specific subject matter experts (e.g. automation, process, maintenance, lab/compliance, safety…) visiting the facility to conduct due diligence. Accordingly, we request access to the facilities for two days which will require advance planning with IBWC and the existing operator.

A second site visit can be done by appointment. Schedule by contacting Nicolas Chapa at NICOLAS.CHAPA@ibwc.gov cc Philip.johnson@ibwc.gov .

4. Will we have an opportunity to visit the off-site facilities? If not, how will proposers gain understanding of the condition of these facilities?

A visit to the canyon collectors and pump stations is included in the site visit.

5. Is the list of assets included with the solicitation up to date and complete?

List of assets provided is the most complete.

6. Please provide a copy of the existing contract including all pertinent addendums for review.

CO will provide a redacted copy by upon request. Email Philip.johnson@ibwc.gov mailto:NICOLAS.CHAPA@ibwc.gov mailto:Philip.johnson@ibwc.gov mailto:Philip.johnson@ibwc.gov