Attachment_0013_Combined_Q A.pdf

Q1. The umbrella scope identifies different quantities for PCAPP Campaign 1 Waste Containers than the numbers identified in Task 6. Please clarify which list is correct.

A1. Quantities in Task 6 are the correct amounts.

Q2. The umbrella scope under 3.5 indicates that Wastes which contain Schedule 2 Constituents are identified in Appendix A. Appendix A does not identify any Schedule 2 constituents. Please clarify.

A2. 2. Contractor must be able to address wastes from Sch 2 chemicals. None were identified in the Umbrella.

Q3. Page 60 Section L.1.4 (2) identifies a "cost comparison shall be submitted in the format shown in Appendix B of the SOW" but Appendix B is the CDRLs and does not include this format. Please provide the format.

A3. Appendix B, D003 states that the format should be: Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint) or in another format approved by the Government.

Paragraph L.1.4(2.) has been revised from:

"The Offeror shall provide an initial pricing of treating each waste stream listed in Appendix A of the task order 0001 SOW through task order 0006 SOW using:

An existing non-incineration technology if applicable, incineration. The Offeror shall compare the costs of each approach. The cost comparison shall be submitted in the format shown in Appendix B of the SOW.

Sufficient detail must be provided in the cost breakdown to allow a consistent evaluation of the anticipated costs. Waste shipment costs shall be presented as a separate line item.

The waste streams and volumes/quantities listed in Appendix A of the task orders 0001 through 0006 SOW shall be used for cost proposal purposes only. They do not represent guaranteed amounts for the contract.

To:

"2. The Offeror shall provide an initial pricing of treating each waste stream listed in Appendix A of the task order 0001 SOW through task order 0006 SOW using:

An existing non-incineration technology if applicable, incineration. The Offeror shall compare the costs of each approach. The cost comparison shall be submitted in a matrix format using Microsoft Office or a format compatible with Microsoft Office.

Sufficient detail must be provided in the cost breakdown to allow a consistent evaluation of the anticipated costs. Waste shipment costs shall be presented as a separate line item.

The waste streams and volumes/quantities listed in Appendix A of the task orders 0001 through 0006 SOW shall be used for cost proposal purposes only. They do not represent guaranteed amounts for the contract."

Q4. Section L.1.2.3 states "The Offeror shall identify the extent to which the Offeror (prime and team members identified in the proposal) has been involved in similar or related contracts awarded within the past five years." Please consider extending the time frame to contracts awarded in the past ten years.

A4. The Government has opted to use the five year time frame for WMS and CWC

Compliance/Experience to ensure the selected contracts were operating under more recent environmental regulations. As such, the Government declines extending the time frame for contracts awarded from five to ten years.

Q5. In response to a request to extend the time frame from the past five years to the past 10 years for contracts with relevant WMS and CWC Compliance/Experience, the Government declined to extend the timeframe to ensure that the contracts were operating under the most current environmental regulations. The storage, transport, treatment and disposal of WMS wastes must comply with local, state and Federal environmental statutes. We concur that applicable environmental regulations may have been revised over the past five years.

However, the factors which determine compliance with the handling of Scheduled CWC wastes are governed by the requirements of the Chemical Weapons Convention, an International Treaty. The requirements governing compliance with the CWC concerning the handling of Scheduled Wastes, as specified in the Chemical Weapons Convention, has not been altered since the ratification of the Treaty, and, it is important to note that a limited amount of CWC waste has required waste management in the US over the past 5 years. We therefore request that the time frame for only CWC experience be extended to 10 years.

A5. The Government opts to keep the five year timeline for CWC as stated in the Request for Proposal.

Q6. Section L1.4.1-4 states "An applicable spend plan, by month, shall be included for each of the two technology types."

Section L.1.4.-2 states "The Offeror shall submit a summary of all direct and indirect rates (e.g. labor, overhead, general and administrative, etc.) applicable to the expected period of contract performance for each of the two technology types (incineration and non-incineration)."

Section L.1.4.2-2 states "The proposal shall group its cost separately according to the two technology types."

a) The two technology types referred to in the RFP are incineration and non-incineration. The narrative appears to indicate that two (2) cost estimates will presented for all six (6) task orders, so that a total of 12 cost estimates will be submitted with the proposal submittal. Is this interpretation correct?

b) If the above interpretation is correct, please consider a more moderate approach. The recommendation is to only require two (2) task order cost estimates for the anticipated award tasks - Tasks 1 and 6. Tasks 2-5 would only have one (1) cost estimate associated with them.

A6. The Government concurs with the proposed approach of a separate cost for incineration and non-incineration for Task 0001 and Task 0006 and one cost estimate for non-incineration for Task 0002 through Task 0005.

Q7. Attachment 11 Small Business Matrix. In reference to "Total Participation Dollars," Cell I41 contains the following "Note: This figure shall equal $12.1 Billion as stated in paragraph L.9.3.2.3." However, we did not see this section reference in the subject RFP. However, Section L.1.5.5.3.1.7 states "The total participation dollars shall equal the total evaluated price."

Can the Government please confirm the offeror should respond in accordance with Section L.1.5.5.3.1.7 or otherwise clarify?

A7. This statement was inadvertently left on the Matrix and should have been deleted because it does not apply. The offeror should respond in accordance with Section L.5.5.3.1.7.

Q8: Please refer to the following text in RFP Section L.1.3:

"Provide Contract References (Form 2) followed by a narrative addressing the aspects of the work and drawing parallels to the requirements in this solicitation. The narrative shall then address the items listed below. Each project description in Form 2 shall average no longer than four pages."

Does the 4-page limit for each project description include the first page of the form, which contains client contact and other contract-specific information?

A8: No, the first page does not count toward the total of four pages.

Q9: Regarding the statement: "Each project description in Form 2 shall average no longer than four pages", is each project description limited to a maximum of four pages, or, can the projects average four pages each in total (i.e., one project may be 3 pages, another may be 5 pages, providing an average of 4 pages)?

A9: While the referenced RFP paragraph does use the word "average", the Government's intent was to have a maximum of four pages for each project description.