RFP 24-3117 Q and A.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 14 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Endangered Species Act Assessments
- Solicitation number
- RFP-761-240000003117-2
- Issued by
- Michigan
About this file
This document is a Question and Answer worksheet related to Request for Proposal (RFP) 24-3117 issued by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE). The RFP is seeking services for the plugging and abandonment of approximately 245 orphaned oil and gas wells across the state. Key details include:
The Statement of Work outlines the requirements for each well site, including providing location information, conducting IPAC assessments, and obtaining SHPO clearance. EGLE will work with the awarded contractor to prioritize and schedule the projects. The RFP states that all wells must be completed under this contract. Bidders were required to attend a mandatory pre-proposal meeting, and the worksheet includes a list of the attendees.
Regarding pricing, items 2-8 in the Pricing Schedule are for informational purposes only and will only be utilized if the project scope is altered or if Formal Consultation is required. The 10% SDVO preference applies to the prime contractor. The RFP has been updated to clarify the correct number of sites and reporting requirements.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Schedule C - Example Species List.pdf | ||
| Schedule E - Example FWS Concurrence Letter.pdf | ||
| Revised RFP 240000003117 Endangered Species Act Assessments.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP 240000003117 Endangered Species Act Assessments.docx | DOCX document | |
| Schedule D - Example Crosswalk.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Question # | Document and Section | Page # | Bidder Question | EGLE Response |
| 1 | Vendor Questions Worksheet | 13 | Does the SDVO 10% bonus get awarded if the firm is on the team or do they need to be the prime? | The SDVO 10% preference is applied to the prime contractor. |
| 2 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 1 - Requirements | 42-45 | What other information other than location would typically be provided for each well or package? | Additional information can be found on the Michigan Orphan Wells Dashboard: https://egle.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/33245f79c74b4b0ca24768c947fd8fa6 |
| 3 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 1 - Requirements | 42-45 | Will you be defining/providing the action area around each well/facility? | Not specifically. The action area, in general will be a box shape that will surround the wells/facilities included in each specific project. |
| 4 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 1 - Requirements | 42-45 | Is the table you would like us to provide with the IPAC results and explanations for why a "not likely to effect" etc designation was assigned available for us to take a look at? | See Schedule D for this information. |
| 5 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 1 - Requirements | 42-45 | Will a project schedule be provided by EGLE? | Yes. The EGLE Program Manager will work with the awarded contractor to setup a schedule and prioritize the projects. |
| 6 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 1 - Requirements | 42-45 | Does EGLE expect that all the wells will be completed during this project/contract? | Yes. |
| 7 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 1 - Requirements | 42-45 | Is there a particular order or priority for the wells/projects? | Yes. The EGLE Program Manager will work with the awarded contractor to setup a schedule and prioritize the projects. |
| 8 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 1 - Requirements | 42-45 | The RFP notes approximately 245 individual sites. On page 54 it states 345 individual sites. Please clarify. | The correct answer is 245 sites. Page 54 of the RFP has been updated with the correct number. |
| 9 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 3 - Acceptance | 46 | The RFP notes the Contract must submit the complete Application for SHPO Section 106 Consultation for each location. Is this correct? | No this is not correct. RFP Section 3.1 Acceptance, Section 5.3 Reporting, Section 8.3 Procedure and Section 10 Service Level Agreement have been updated with the correct information. |
| 10 | Schedule A: Statement of Work; Section 10 Service Level Agreement | 54 | Does the scope also include A, B, and C? Or is it meant to say a contractor (others) has already submitted A, B, and C? Please clarify. | The RFP has been updated to reflect Section 7 ESA services and producibles. |
| 11 | Schedule B: Pricing | 57-58 | Should our pricing include items 2-8? | Pricing for items 2-8 are for informational purposes and will only be utilized in the event alterations are made to the project scope, or if Formal Consultation is necessary to obtain concurrence from DOI and/or FWS to start project activities. |
| Vendors who attended mandatory pre-proposal meeting: |
| AECOM |
| Egis |
| GEI Consultants |
| ASC Group |
| EnviroScience, Inc. |
| Merjent, Inc. |
| Civil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. |
| EA Engineering, Science and Technology |
| Davey Resource Group, Inc. |
| Mannik & Smith Group, Inc. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .