RFQ Amend 02_Atch Amendment 0002.pdf

Amendment 0002

The purpose of this amendment 0002 is to respond to the vendor’s pre-quotation question number 14:

Question 01 (Reference PWS 4.5, PWS 4.2; RFQ Section L 2.0) PWS para 4.5 states that the cost of the PFAS sampling, testing, and wastewater disposal requirements of para 4.5 shall be included in para 4.2 (CLIN x001). So that all quotations are prepared on a common and comparable basis, please confirm the following pricing assumptions:

(01-a) vendors should assume the number of annual PFAS sampling events will be 9 to 21 PFAS tests per year (Section L 2.0);

(01-b) the assumed rate or frequency of re-treatment and re-testing under para 4.5.3.b will be one (1) re-treatment and re-testing cycle per year;

(01-c) vendors should assume no (zero) annual quantity (gallons) of treated wastewater will require off-base disposal under para 4.5.3.c after a fourth failed test; and

(01-d) vendors should assume that OWW received by the contractor from the Government contains PFAS at levels that require treatment prior to discharge.

Answer 01 (01-a) In accordance with PWS Paragraph 4.5.2, the contractor is required to conduct sampling, testing, and analysis of effluent prior to each treated wastewater discharge. The PWS does not specify a fixed number of annual sampling events, as this depends entirely on the contractor's specific operational throughput, barge/holding capacities, and discharge frequency. However, to ensure all proposals are prepared on a common and comparable basis for evaluation, vendors should utilize the estimated 21 PFAS tests per year as specified in Section L 2.0 of the Solicitation.

(01-b) The Government cannot project or guarantee the frequency of re-treatment and re-testing cycles, as this depends on the effectiveness of the contractor's proposed treatment technology. Under PWS Paragraph 4.5.3.b, if a batch fails to meet the effluent limit (below 50 ppt combined PFOS/PFOA), the contractor is required to re-treat and re-test the batch (up to three additional times, for a total of four tests) at no additional cost to the Government. Vendors must assess their own operational risk and build any anticipated re-treatment/re-testing costs into their unit rate for CLIN x001.

(01-c) The Government does not guarantee that zero gallons of treated wastewater will require off-base disposal. Per PWS Paragraph 4.5.3.c, if a batch fails the fourth test (the third re-test), the contractor must cease treatment and arrange for transport and disposal to a licensed off-base facility in accordance with Chapter 16 of the JEGS. PWS Paragraph 4.5 states that the cost of all wastewater disposal requirements under Para 4.5 shall be included in Para 4.2 (CLIN x001). Therefore, the contractor bears the financial and operational risk of any such off-base disposal, and vendors should formulate their pricing to reflect their treatment system's reliability.

(01-d) Under PWS Section 3.0 (Definitions), Oily Wastewater (OWW) is defined to include "wastewater contaminated with small amounts of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) that are incidental to normal operations," and PFAS is noted as "commonly found in AFFF." Due to the extremely low effluent limits set by USFJ (below 50 ppt combined PFOS/PFOA under PWS Paragraph 4.5.3.b), vendors should assume that OWW received from the Government contains PFAS at levels that will require treatment prior to discharge to comply with the contract. All costs to achieve compliance must be included in CLIN x001.

Note: These assumptions are for evaluation and quotation purposes only. The resulting contract line item (CLIN) will be awarded on a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) basis, and no post-award price adjustments or equitable adjustments will be made based on the actual quantities.

Question 02 (Reference: PWS 4.5.2, PWS 4.5.2.g, PWS 4.5.3.d; CLIN x001) PWS para 4.5.2 requires sampling, testing, and analysis of effluent prior to treated wastewater discharge, through a DoD ELAP-accredited laboratory in accordance with EPA Draft Method 1633, with samples shipped under temperature control (para 4.5.2.g). Our understanding is that DoD ELAP laboratories with PFAS within their accredited scope are located outside Japan. Please confirm:

(02-a) what is the laboratory turnaround time (calendar days from sample shipment to receipt of results) vendors should assume for pricing;

(02-b) whether barge days elapsing during the time in which treated wastewater is held while awaiting laboratory results and EPOC discharge approval (para 4.5.3.d) are counted as OWW Barge Service days under CLIN x001; and

(02-c) whether task order schedules will specify a specific maximum laboratory turnaround time from sampling to certified results delivery to discharge approval.

Answer 02 (02-a) The PWS does not establish a mandatory or assumed laboratory turnaround time (TAT). Under PWS Paragraph 4.5.2.g, the contractor is solely responsible for coordinating sampling events and sample receipts with their selected analyzing laboratory, including managing the logistics of shipping samples under temperature control (below 6 ºC) for a period of at least 48 hours to account for transit delays. Because the contractor must utilize a DoD Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (DoD ELAP) accredited laboratory (Paragraph 4.5.2.c), which may be located outside of Japan, the contractor must obtain TAT estimates directly from their subcontracted laboratory. Vendors must factor these shipping and laboratory processing timelines into their operational planning and include all associated logistics costs in Paragraph 4.2 (CLIN x001).

(02-b) No. In accordance with PWS para 4.2.3, a job is measured per day, per ship and defined as when an OWW barge service is scheduled for and set aside for active OWW collection. Idle/barge days spent waiting for laboratory results are not billable under CLIN x001.

(02-c) No. A task order schedule is for active OWW collection days.

Question 03 (Reference: PWS 2.1, PWS 4.5.3.b, PWS 4.5.2.f, PWS 6.1 (03-a) PWS 2.1 References (b) through (e) (CFASINST 5090.5, COMUSFJ Memos of 29 May 20 and 18 Nov 20, and OASD Memo of 01 May 24) establish compliance requirements, including the USFJ effluent limits cited in para 4.5.3.b, that directly affect pricing. Please furnish these references to vendors or advise how they may be obtained.

(03-b) PWS 4.5.3.b cites "PWS 2.1 Reference (d)" for the USFJ effluent limit. Please confirm whether the intended reference is PWS 2.1 Reference (c), COMUSFJ Memo of 29 May 20.

(03-c) PWS 4.5.2.f and PWS 6.1 cite "PWS Reference (g)"; however, the reference list in PWS 2.1 ends at Reference (f). Please clarify the intended references.

Answer 03

(03-a) The PWS reference documents (a) through (f) will be provided upon request to the Contracting Point of Contact (POC)."

(03-c) This is typographical error. The intended reference is PWS Reference (f). PWS is updated.

Question 04 (Reference: PWS 4.5.1) PWS 4.5.1 states that the contractor shall not add fresh water before a sampling event. Please confirm that, before a sampling event, the contractor is also prohibited from adding non-fresh water or dilution of any kind.

Answer 04 Confirmed. No dilution of any kind (freshwater, non-freshwater, or wastewater) is permitted prior to a sampling event.

Question 05 (Reference: PWS 4.5.3.e) PWS 4.5.3.e states before discharge if contractor re-treats “no unapproved wastewater can be added”.

Please confirm that in this case no dilution, with water of any kind, whether wastewater or other, can occur to any batch.

Answer 05 Confirmed. No dilution of any kind is permitted.

Question 06 (Reference: RFQ 52.212-2, C. Evaluation of Technical Quotation (c); PWS 4.5.2.e) Technical evaluation factor (c) requires use of a DoD ELAP-accredited laboratory, and PWS para 4.5.2.e requires the selected laboratory to quantitate combined PFOS/PFOA in wastewater to below 50 ppt.

Please confirm

(06-a) the technical quotation should include the identity of the DoD ELAP-accredited laboratory that is accredited to measure PFAS per QSM Table B-24 that the vendor intends to use, and

(06-b) a quotation that does not identify a properly accredited laboratory will be rated technically Unacceptable.

Answer 06 (06-a) Confirmed. Solicitation Attachment B, Technical Information Sheet, was updated and attached.

(06-b) Confirmed.

Question 07 (Reference: PWS 4.5.2) PWS 4.5.2.a states “the contractor may transfer treated wastewater to other barge/tank and conduct sampling, testing and analysis of effluent.” Must such other tank be empty with no dilution of any kind before such transfer?

Answer 07 Yes. The receiving tank must be clean/empty, and no dilution of any kind is permitted. PWS is updated.

Question 08 (Reference: PWS 4.5.3.f; PWS Atch (1); RFQ 52.212-2, C. Evaluation of Technical Quotation (d))

PWS para 4.5.3.f requires the contractor to “identify and obtain pre-approval for at least one alternative, licensed disposal facility or method in the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) in case the primary incineration facility is unavailable.” The EPP Template (PWS Atch (1)) does not contain a section specific to PFAS management. Please confirm:

(08-a) an acceptable EPP must identify both the primary incineration/disposal facility and at least one alternative licensed facility for wastewater that fails to meet the para 4.5.3.b limit;

(08-b) the contractor may identify and utilize an alternative method of PFAS destruction if and when a method other than incineration is approved by the Government; and

(08-c) an EPP that does not address these elements will be rated Unacceptable under technical evaluation factor (d).

Answer 08 (08-a) The Government does not require an exclusive, binding subcontractor agreement at the time of proposal submission. To maintain a competitive environment and account for regional capacity limits in Japan, vendors must identify a primary licensed disposal facility in their EPP. The identification of an alternative licensed facility is highly encouraged but may be finalized and approved by the EPOC post-award.

(08-b) When alternative method of PFAS destruction is approved by the Government, the contract may be modified. Negotiation will be conducted as necessary.

(08-c) A quotation that fails to identify a viable, licensed primary disposal facility will be rated Unacceptable. However, the lack of a pre-secured alternative facility at the time of proposal submission will not, by itself, result in an Unacceptable rating.

Question 09 (Reference: DFARS 252.204-7012; DFARS 252.204-7024) DFARS 252.204-7012 is incorporated into this solicitation, and DFARS 252.204-7024 is included in the provisions. Please confirm:

(09-a) performance is expected to involve Controlled Unclassified Information, such as vessel schedules and movement information provided for service scheduling; and

(09-b) whether offerors must have a current NIST SP 800-171 assessment score posted in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) prior to award.

Answer 09 (09-a) Confirmed. Vessel movements and operational schedule are CUI.

(09-b) Yes. Offerors must have an active NIST SP 800-171 assessment score posted in SPRS prior to contract award.

PWS and Solicitation Section L & M are updated.

Question 10 (Reference: RFQ B 3.0, F 2.0(c), FAR 52.217-8, SF 1449 Block 8; PWS 1.2, 4.4.1.c) (10-a) Section B 3.0 references a minimum guarantee but states no amount - please confirm the minimum guarantee amount of the resulting IDIQ contract.

(10-b) Section F 2.0(c) states the option to extend services may be exercised "within 30 days of contract expiration," while FAR 52.217-8 as incorporated states "within 60 days" - please confirm which applies.

(10-c) PWS para 1.2 lists five requiring activities; para 4.4.1.c includes vacuuming OWW from POL bulk storage tanks - please confirm whether fuel-related OWW is also a (6th) requiring activity and remains within scope.

Answer 10 (10-a) The minimum guaranteed amount is $1,000.00. Solicitation is updated

(10-b) FAR 52.217-8 applies; the option may be exercised within 60 days of contract expiration. The clause is corrected.

(10-c) POL bulk storage tanks are removed. PWS is updated.

Question 11 (Reference: PWS 4.5.3.a, PWS 4.5.3.d; QASP Performance Objective 2) Because PWS para 4.5.3.a Form-B (Copies of Test Results from PFAS Sampling Event) is due to the Govt EPOC within five (5) working days of receiving results and 4.5.3.d requires the contractor to obtain approval from the Govt EPOC (CFAS) prior to treated wastewater discharge, and so that vendors can schedule and price the discharge cycle, please confirm:

(11-a) will discharge approval under para 4.5.3.d be granted before or after the Govt EPOC has received and reviewed passing test results (Form-B) for the batch concerned, consistent with QASP Performance Objective 2 ("Review of PFAS test results and inspection")?;

(11-b) what is the expected time needed for Government review between contractor submission of test results and discharge approval?;

(11-c) may a treated wastewater batch be discharged into Japanese waters prior to receipt of such approval?;

(11-d) will the Government observe PFAS sampling events noticed under Form-A and verify sample chain of custody, or may the contractor perform sampling without Government witnessing?; and

(11-e) will the Govt EPOC or a designated Government representative witness the actual discharge of the approved treated wastewater batch, so as to verify that the batch discharged is the same batch for which passing test results were reviewed and approval was granted?

Answer 11 (11-a) Approval is granted only after the Government has received and review passing test results.

(11-b) The Government will provide a timely review; a specific timeframe is not guaranteed.

(11-c) No.

(11-d) The Government reserves the right to witness any and all sampling events.

(11-e) The Government reserved the right to witness any and all discharrges.

Question 12 (Reference: RFQ M.1.0)

RFQ M.1.0 limits the solicitation to only sources “duly authorized to operate and do business in Japan, as prescribed by DFARS 252.225-7042”. The next line in the same section states “contractors outside of Japan will not be eligible to receive an award”, seemingly conflicting with the first paragraph where “Contractors located outside Japan must submit documentation that unambiguously demonstrates the Offeror's compliance with DFARS 252.225-7042 as a part of their quotation”.

Please confirm that, because subcontracting the licensed portion to a properly licensed Japanese firm satisfies the requirements under DFARS 252.225-7042, the Government will allow a contractor with a physical address in SAM that is outside of Japan to meet this requirement by subcontracting the relevant portion to a properly licensed Japanese firm.

Answer 12 Confirmed. Contractors located outside Japan may meet the requirements of DFARS 252.225-7042 by subcontracting with a properly licensed Japanese firms.

Question 13 (Reference: PWS 1.4) PWS 1.4 List of Deliverable Forms identifies as Form A, Notification of PFAS Sampling Event, referencing PWS 4.5.1.a. Should this Form A reference PWS 4.5.2.b?

Answer 13 Yes. This is typo. Form A should reference PWS 4.5.2.b. PWS is updated.

Question 14 (Reference: RFQ N6264926QE025 B 2.0) In the attachment “RFQ N6264926QE025 B 2.0 PRICING SCHEDULE AND ORDERING PERIODS,” under

(a) Contract Structure, it states: “This is a Single-Award Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract.” All Task Orders issued under this contract will be Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP).” However, based on my reading of the PWS, the daily collection services and waste disposal services - which are distinct in nature - are combined.

While we can calculate the costs for the daily collection services and provide an appropriate price quote, regarding the disposal of the waste generated, the volume to be disposed of is unknown, making it impossible to provide a price quote under the FFP model.

To operate this contract at the optimal price, could you please separate the items for routine collection services and waste disposal services, and set a unit price for the waste disposal service based on the actual volume processed off-base?

Answer 14 The Government does not collect or maintain data regarding sludge or other post treatment residual volumes generated from OWW processing. The only workload information tracked by the Government is the historical volume of OWW collected, which is provided in Section L 2.0 of the RFQ. These monthly collection volumes constitute the Government furnished baseline for offeror proposal development.

Residual waste outputs vary based on each offeror’s proposed treatment methodology and equipment configuration. Because the Government does not prescribe the contractor’s technical approach, it does not track, estimate, or provide metrics related to post treatment waste generation.

The Government will not revise the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLIN structure and will not establish separate CLINs for collection and disposal services. In accordance with the FFP contract type, offerors are responsible for estimating and pricing all disposal requirements associated with their proposed technical solution, using the historical OWW collection volumes as the basis for workload projections.

Question 15 (Reference: PWS) If international laws or Japanese domestic laws that we are required to comply with are amended during the contract period, resulting in changes to various standards, will there be an opportunity to review costs and operations again?

Answer 15 When related laws/regulations are updated, the contract may be modified. Negotiation will be conducted as necessary.

Question 16 (Reference: Solicitation) Although the deadline for submitting questions is today, depending on the content of your response, we may wish to ask further questions. Would it be possible for you to accommodate this?

Answer 16 Extended.

Question 17 We would like to know if this is a brand new contract OR if there is (was) an incumbent performing these services. If not brand new, could you please provide the current / previous contract number?

Answer 17 This requirement is a recurring requirement. The services were previously performed under Contract Number N6824624D0001 by K.I. Kogyo."