RFP Addendum 1 - 2027 Lab ISID Contracts.pdf

DTMB-0414 RFP (Rev 2/22)

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 SIGMA Vendor VSS as an attachment.

TO: ALL PROPOSERS DATE ISSUED 10/27/26

PROJECT NAME

2027 Indefinite Scope Indefinite Delivery (ISID) for Laboratory Testing Services

FILE NUMBER

NA

PROJECT DIRECTOR

Sadi Rayyan

PROPOSAL DUE DATE:

11/19/26 at 2:00 p.m. local time

ADDENDUM ITEMS: Please acknowledge reading this Addendum in your proposal.

Item 1:

The proposal’s due date has been extended to Thursday November 19, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. local time.

Please see the following pages for questions/answers.

APPROVED BY: Sadi Rayyan

PROJECT DIRECTOR DATE: 10/27/26

http://www.buy4michigan.com/

2027 ISID for Laboratory Testing Services

ADDENDUM ITEMS:

QUESTIONS

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

Q1. Does the bidder need to provide PE results for methods that aren't noted in the Project Statement, specifically?

A1. They should provide PT results for any analysis for which they are bidding.

Q2. Do you want us to submit the CoC templates with our bid for this contract?

A2. Yes

Q3. Could you please provide additional information around EGLE paying an unannounced visit to audit?

A3. When an audit is performed, it will be scheduled with advanced notice.

Q4. Who is responsible for payment of laboratory services: the State or the contracted consultant?

A4. The State will pay the lab directly for services performed under this contract.

Q5. Will laboratory pricing be shared with contracted consultants who utilize overflow laboratory services?

A5. Yes, contracted consultants will have access to pricing for the overflow laboratories.

Q6. Is this an all-or-nothing award, or can a laboratory be considered for analyses performed solely in-house without participating with a subcontracted laboratory?

A6. You may apply for only those services you offer in-house. You are not required to subcontract services that your lab does not provide.

Q7. Is having EGLE Drinking Water lab certification a requirement for bidding on this contract?

A7. No.

Q8. Do you require a copy of the QA Manual for each site as part of our bid?

a. Or can we provide one example QA Manual?

b. If you require something from each site, can we provide a cover page with Table of Contents, rather than the full document? We have come to consider these QA Manuals confidential/proprietary and strongly prefer not to issue them outside the company.

A8. The laboratory’s primary QA Manual is the one that is desired (aka Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP)). It would be independent of individual sites and/or projects.

Q9. For Business Org Chart – do you need something for each laboratory site? Or are you more interested in seeing how the labs are structured to work together in support of your program?

A9. Yes, for the second part. Show the committee members how the labs are structured to work together in support of EGLE’s program.

Q10. Our laboratories hold numerous accreditations. Can we provide just our primary NELAP scope of accreditation? Or are you looking for all of them?

A10. The NELAP alone will suffice provided that the analyses within that scope include the analyses that are up for bid.

Q11. We would like to propose two “primary” locations. Both laboratories already provide support to EGLE’s program. Our plan of approach would be for EGLE to continue to interact with these labs as

2027 ISID for Laboratory Testing Services they have in the past – work with those two lab specific PMs, receive supplies from those two facilities

– the only practical difference would be that EGLE would pay each facility under the same legal entity name whereas previously they were separate legal entities. Would this be acceptable to EGLE?

A11. There should be one primary contact for the laboratory. This contact could then decide which of the two primary locations any overflow lab work would go to.

Q12. Could you please provide clarification about what "low aq biosolids" is/are? Most biosolid samples are low in moisture content.

A12. From our understanding, low aqueous biosolids would have higher moisture content (or lower %Total Solids) and this would likely include samples that resemble sewage, sludge, slurries, etc.

Q13. Is there any potential for low % solid biosolid samples? That is, less than 5% solids.

A13. Unsure.

Q14. You have grouped several matrices for the single line item for EPA 1633. May we break this out?

A14. Yes

Q15. How many contracts do you plan to award?

A15. A decision has not been made on the number of labs to be awarded contracts.

Q16. What are the evaluation criteria for award?

A16. As stated in the RFP, the professionals will be evaluated based on their Technical Proposal - Part I, and Cost Proposal - Part II. Proposals will be evaluated by an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee based on Technical Portion - Part I fifty percent (50%) and the Cost Proposal - Part II fifty percent 50%).

Technical portions include the following breakdown: 10% Business Organization, 10% Accreditations/Certificates, 30% Experience and Proficiency Testing, 30% Quality Assurance Project Plan, 10% Requested Services and Capacity, and 10% Special Factors.

Cost portion includes the following breakdown: 90% Per Sample Cost and 10% Rush Turn Around Time Cost Multiplier.

Q17. We would like the opportunity to discuss the following, can we include some suggested language in our proposal? Or will that result in rejection of our response?

a. Limitation on liability tied to contract value or insurance limits.

b. Clarification that indemnification obligations are limited to damages caused by Eurofins' negligence, willful misconduct, or breach.

c. Exclusion of consequential, special, punitive, and indirect damage.

A17. No. Qualifying a proposal may result in a rejection of the proposal. We aren’t allowed constitutionally to do so, and a selected lab must accept all terms and conditions of the contract as written without any changes.

Otherwise, the contract cannot be executed

END OF ADDENDUM 1