Addendum 1 2020 Lab ISID RFP.pdf

DTMB-0414 RFP (Rev 6/16)

DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

State Facilities Administration Design and Construction Division

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ADDENDUM NO. 1

This form identifies an Addendum to a Request for Proposal for Professional Services, and incorporates interpretations or clarifications, modifications, and other information into the Request for Proposals. Addenda will be numbered by the Project Director and distributed through www.michigan.gov/SIGMAVSS as an attachment.

TO:

ALL PROPOSERS

DATE ISSUED

12/16/2019

PROJECT NAME

2020 Laboratory Testing Indefinite Scope Indefinite Delivery Contract

FILE NUMBER

Various

PROJECT DIRECTOR

Kristi Zakrzewski

PROPOSAL DUE DATE:

1/9/2020

ADDENDUM ITEMS:

1. Answers to questions received by 12/11/19, 5:00 PM. Three pages.

APPROVED BY:

DATE: 12/16/2019

December 16, 2019

To: All interested parties

Subject: Department of Technology, Management, and Budget/ Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy 2020 Laboratory Testing Indefinite Scope Indefinite Delivery Contract

Request for Proposal Addendum No. 1

Please acknowledge receipt of this Addendum in your proposal.

I. Questions

The following questions have been compiled to clarify answers to questions in portions of the RFP package:

Q1. How will proposed alternate/additional methods for PFAS analysis be evaluated and scored? Is it the 10% Special Factors portion of the Technical Evaluation?

A1. Yes

Q2. Would you please confirm that the Professional does not need to provide a proposal for all analyses in a specific Service Area?

A2. The Professional is not required to provide a cost for all analyses listed in the Task Cost Table.

Q3. If a Professional has provided support to EGLE as a subcontractor, is that information notable as prior experience?

A3. Each Professional will need to determine the most appropriate and applicable experiences to be included in their individual proposals. Article 2 of the Contracted Laboratory Questionnaire(s) requests specific information regarding current and past contracted laboratory services.

Q4. Section 16.9 - Reporting compounds routinely analyzed but not requested. Does this apply to PFAS analysis?

A4. Yes. There are four published methods for PFAS analysis (537.1, 537 rev 1.1, ASTM D7979, ASTM D7968) requested in the Task Cost Table. The Task for each of these methods includes the full list of analytes per each specific method.

Q5. Must the Professional possess a Michigan Based Business License at the time of proposal submission?

A5. No.

Q6. Subcontractor: If multiple laboratories in a network will be utilized, is bidder required to identify a lead laboratory and list other network labs as subcontractors, or does “subcontractor” only apply to separate legal entities supporting subcontracted testing?

A6. For proposals that include laboratory services to be provided from multiple laboratory locations that are the same company, it is not necessary to identify a lead laboratory. Subcontractor refers to additional laboratories that are not within the same company.

Q7. Certification: Since Michigan does not have a state accreditation program for PFAS in drinking water or certify for other testing on non-potable, soil or other solid matrices, is evidence of NELAC or state-specific accreditation considered sufficient to assert “certified” for methods being proposed?

A7. Certifications are specific to method and media and will not extend to methods or media other than specified in the certification/accreditation. NELAC, federal, state-specific, or any other nationally recognized accreditation body will be accepted.

Q8. Incremental Sampling Method Questionnaire – Does the questionnaire apply only to ISM sample processing, or does it also apply to analyses performed on processed samples?

A8. The questionnaire only applies to sample processing.

Q9. Task Cost Table: General question – Is it permissible to utilize alternative or updated methods – e.g., Method 624.1 in lieu of Method 624?

A9. Yes, for updated methods. For all tasks in the Task Cost Table with a specified method, costs shall be provided for the specified method, without substitution, alternation, or modification. When a method has not been specified, the Contracted Laboratory shall indicate the method(s), as appropriate. All other methods and costs should be provided in the response to Article 5: Special Factors of the Contracted Laboratory Questionnaire.

Q10. Task Cost Table: Task # 48 – Mercury in Air – Bidder proposes to utilize Method

NIOSH 6009.

A10. See answer A9.

Q11. Task Cost Table: Task # 50 – Soil/Sed Fraction Prep – Please confirm that this cost/sample is for the fractionation only – and does not include the cost of metals analyses.

A11. Yes, fraction only.

Q12. Task Cost Table: Tasks # 299-301 – 1,4-Dioxane Method is not referenced. Is it permissible to offer multiple methods for analysis at different rates – e.g., 522, 8260SIM, and/or 8270SIM – or does the state have a preferred method?

A12. Yes. List the preferred method in the Task Cost Table. Please refer to answer A9 for all other methods.

Q13. Task Cost Table: Tasks # 310-313 – Turnaround Times – There could be economic benefit for the state to express Rush TATs as a specific number of business days vs a range of days. For example, a 2 BD TAT premium will be higher than a 3 BD premium. Given ranges, bidders will need to quote the higher of the premiums for both TATs. Is it acceptable to quote separate rush TAT premiums for 1 BD, 2 BD, 3 BD, 4 BD & 5 BD. Ranges are more appropriate for longer TATs (6-7 BD & 8-13 BD).

A13. No. Please provide costs for the turn around time listed in the Task Cost

Table.

Q14. Task Cost Table: Task # 452 – PFAS ASTM D7979 – Aqueous matrices.

Method ASTM D7979 is a performance based method. Bidder proposes to reference method ASTM D7979, Methanol extraction – using LC MS/MS with Isotope Dilution. Will this method modification be acceptable to the State?

A14. See answer A9.

Q15. Task Cost Table: Tasks # 453, 455-457 – PFAS MPART – Multiple matrices. Is the 537M method reference acceptable to the State, or would the State prefer that the laboratory SOP be reported as the reference method?

A15. See answer A9.

Q16. Task Cost Table: Task # 454 – PFAS ASTM D7979 – Soil/Sediment matrices.

Bidder proposes to utilize method 537Mod – LC MS/MS with Isotope Dilution (or lab SOP, if the State prefers) as an alternative to Method ASTM D7968. Will this substitution be acceptable to the State?

A16. See answer A9.