Amendment 0003 - Contractor Questions and Government Answers.pdf

W911KB20R0005

Amendment 0003

Questions/Answers

# Section Question Government Response

PWS 2.8 POL Management; Section 2.1.30 Optional Spill Response (Base Funded), CLINs 0108 and 0109. Should the contractor provide a $0.00 (no cost) CLIN value and assume these CLINs (0108 and 0109) will be funded on a case by case basis? Or should the contractor assume an NTE amount similar to that in Section 2.1.29 (Optional Spill Response, On Call Contractor) invoiced as needed until funds are no longer available? Can the Government provide an NTE to assume for CLIN 0108 and CLIN 0109 if that is the case?

The PWS has been revised to provide additional guidance.

Section M, Volume II, Factor 2: Corporate Experience - 2nd Paragraph indicates "...experience in Alaska will be rated inherently more important...", but the first bullet after this paragraph indicates "positive consideration will be given..." to [projects] "under Air Force fence to fence environmental projects...". These two statements contradict each other, and have huge importance on which projects a team submits for this requirement. There is only one Army fence to fence project in Alaska, and no Air Force. Please clarify if Alaska based compliance experience at Air Force installations is more important than Air Force fence to fence experience in other places.

The statements do not contradict each other. Experience in Alaska will be rated inherantly more important, however as indicated, Air Force Fence to Fence environmental projects will also be given positive consideration.

Section M, Volume II, Factor 2: Corporate Experience - 4th bullet indicates "Proposed key personnel have experience...", but it appears this section is related to evaluating Corporate Experience through executed projects similar in scope, size, and complexity, and that Factor 3: Management Approach is for evaluating Key Personnel's experience. This 4th bullet seems more oriented towards evaluating key personnel than projects. Please clarify.

The section is in reference to positive consideration. As stated, the Government will give positive consideration to projects that include Key Personnel provided in Factor 3 as prescribed.

Section M, Volume II, Factor 2: Corporate Experience - "Positive consideration" list, shouldn't positive consideration be given to executing compliance programs with no regulatory infractions? This would seem more important than "proactive implementation of mitigation plans under a performance-based environmental project to achieve the PO", a requirement geared toward PBRs and not compliance programs.

Section M, Bullet 3 of Factor 2 has been revised as follows: Proactive implementation of mitigation plans under an environmental compliance project to achieve the PO.

Please confirm that the Recycling labor category(ies) from the SCA Wage Determinations are required for the QRP program execution unless otherwise staffed with non-SCA staff.

McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract act states "The wage requirements of the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA or Act) are administered by the Wage and Hour Division (WHD). The SCA’s prevailing wage requirements generally apply to contracts in excess of $2,500, whether negotiated or advertised, entered into by the federal government and the District of Columbia where the principal purpose of the contract is to furnish services in the U.S. through the use of service employees.

The term "service employee" includes any employee engaged in performing services on a covered contract other than an individual employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity as those terms are defined in 29 CFR Part 541."

https://webapps.dol.gov/elaws/elg/sca.htm

Q&A Number 104, the answer to this question impacts the content of proposals significantly. Section L Instructions and Section M Evaluation Factors heavily reference that proposals need to address achieving POs, and not waste space on extra text. For instance, Section L, Section 4.4 Factor 1:

Technical/Risk Approach states "The comprehensive technical approach should describe how all of the POs in the PWS ...will be met...". The first bullet requirement for a Summary Table states we are to provide a table with the Installation, PO, and Brief Description of the Technical Approach. How do we address items in the PWS that have no PO? They would not be included on this table by virtue of the description of the table itself. Similarly, the Section M Evaluation Factors for Factor 1:

Technical/Risk Approach states under subsection (a) 2nd bullet that the proposal should focus on achieving POs within Performance Periods. There is no bullet addressing non-PO related tasks. This holds true throughout the Section L and M requirements for Factors 1, 2, and 3. Please clarify how non-PO related items should be addressed in the Tech/Risk Approach, Corporate Experience, and Management Approach, and what the associated evaluation factors would be for non-PO related tasks.

Every Clin is tied to a performance objective. Non PO tasks may be addressed in the provided pages specified in table 2.2 if the Offeror so chooses.

PWS Table 1, PO 8 has been revised to clarify that it is all inclusive of all media.

Q&A Number 9 and Section 2.1.3.1 state: “The Contractor shall provide and operate a drum crusher in order to crush 10, 30, and 55-gallon drums.”

However in Table 5, GFE, it shows one is provided at both JBER and Eielson. The answer to Q&A # 9 suggests a contractor provided drum crusher is expected for Eielson but not JBER, is this correct?

Correct, the contractor will have to provide a drum crusher for Eielson AFB.

Schedule B Excel Sheet – The CLINs do not indicate to which installation they apply requiring crossreference to the previous Schedule B. If left to contractor interpretation, there is a risk of requirements being missed or mistakenly referenced. Please provide Schedule B identifying which Installation each CLIs applies.

Installations are indicated on Clin structure provided in original solicitation and in Table 35 of the PWS. Schedule B supplied with amendment 2 was supplied at the request of the industry to allow for designated areas to populate cost.

9 Schedule B Excel Sheet – Formulas appear to be broken or missing. Please provide a Schedule B with appropriate equations matching the Government’s requirements for this submittal.

It is not the intend of the Government to supply formulas or do math for the industry. A revised Schedule B will be provided devoid of all formulas.

Schedule B Excel Sheet, SubCLIN Structure Excel Sheet, and Table 35 – It is not clear what the Government expects for pricing on the Option CLINs. For example, CLIN 0077 on the SubCLIN structure indicates there are two Project IDs associated with this JBER project, and Table 35 indicates it would be funded in FY21 and FY24. The note above the option tasks in the SubCLIN structure (row 235) indicates “Additional Requirements: May be exercised up to 5 times each”, and the Schedule B Excel Sheet appears to illustrate the Government wants pricing for each year. Please explain what pricing is required where. Should the pricing for CLIN 0077 be per occurrence? Or total for two occurences? Or total for five occurences?

Pricing for each year should be supplied as indicated for additional requirements as specified for a total of 5 occurences.

Schedule B Excel Sheet – There is a concern that if all option CLINs are quintupled even though they may only occur once or twice during the life of the contract, that overall pricing may exceed the $35M cap identified by USACE. of the contract, that overall pricing may exceed the $35M cap identified by USACE.

Pricing for each year should be supplied as indicated for additional requirements as specified for a total of 5 occurences.

Schedule B Excel Sheet – The excel sheet provided contains hidden rows that have what appears to be Government estimates for certain CLINs.

Several are missing any information at all. Was it the Government’s intent to provide this information, and if so, how should the contracting community interpret this information? Can the Government provide the remaining pricing estimates for CLINs with no information or CLINs that are referencing additional attachments?

Schedule B supplied with amendment 2 was supplied at the request of the industry to allow for designated areas to populate cost. No additional hidden areas are to be populated. A revised Schedule B will be provided devoid of hidden rows.

Questions/Answers

Q&A Number 87 - A two day extension, while appreciated, is not sufficient given the current national situation, the fact that we are just receiving clarification of 113 questions with additional Q&A forthcoming based on the fact that additional questions must be submitted by 15 April. A Word version of the PPQs was only provided at COB 13 April, and these PPQs need to be sent to clients in hopes they will get them completed and submitted within a reasonable timeframe most of whom are working from home or remote locations due to the national crisis. Request an extension to 29 April, one week from the current submittal date, assuming the Government can provide answers to all remaining questions by COB Friday 17 April.

Amendment 3 will revise the proposals due date to 1 May 2020.

14 Can a copy of the OU1 Landfill Operation and Maintenance Plan (USAF, 2009) be provided. The OU1 Post Closure Monitoring Plan references this document for additional details.

A copy of the OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN FEBRUARY 2009 has been provided with this response.

15 CLIN 0101 shows multiple years on the CLIN sheet but all are labeled FY20. Please confirm this CLIN was intended to be exercised over multiple years. A revised Schedule B will be provided.

Section 2.8, POL, the scope is “The Contractor shall perform services in support of petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL) management… management services shall include, but are not limited to, operating and maintaining POL systems to include fuel dispensing operations, hydrant systems, pipelines (installation-wide and major sections), leak detection systems, secondary containment systems, cathodic protection systems, programmable logic control systems, generators, portable tanks and bowsers and similar systems for alternative fuels. a.

Please provide clarification that the scope in red is limited to environmental services management and not operational services management of the tasks.

The contractor will only be providing environmental services support under this contract.

17 Item 2.1.30. Please provide the basis for spill response. I.e.; quantity, product, receiving media (soil, water, etc). The PWS has been revised to provide additional guidance.

Was the RATA completed on EU IDs 5a and 6a during 4Q2019 as indicated in Table 19 and if not, has it been conducted or is it planned for 2020?

The RATAs were completed in November 2019.

What are the actual scheduled test dates for the units listed as being conducted in 2020 in Table 19 and have any of the source tests been conducted already this year?

A PM test was conducted on Boiler 5a in February 2020.

No other tests have been conducted in 2020 due to COVID19. Currently the plan is to conduct these tests later in 2020.

20 Are compliance and reporting required under the Title V air permit expected to be completed under this contract for Clear Air Station or just the Title V Permit Renewal noted in 2.1.11.1?

Under PWS paragraph 2.1.11.1 the contractor shall only be providing TV permit renewal support as indicated in the PWS paragraph. This paragraph does not include compliance reporting support, only permit renewal support.

Section 2.1.17.1 Prepare Source Test Plans “… how operation will be documented” Will there be personnel available on site that will be able to assist in the acquisition of each unit’s operational data? At the very least, is there going to be someone available that can tell us where we can gather this information from? Additionally, does each unit have the proper sensors already installed to make sure that this data is available? i.e. pressure and temperature sensors on catalysts, fuel flow meters, etc.

Personnel onsite are available to answer contractor questions in the preparation of the source test plans.

See provided source test plans and reports for each type of test conducted.

Section 2.1.17.1 Perform Source Tests “The contractor shall also provide all equipment necessary to access the ports and conduct the tests” Do all of the sources listed have Method 1 compliant test locations installed? Or will the contractor be responsible for setting up installation of these test ports?

Source test ports are available.

Section 2.1.17.2 PM Source Test “Forty sample points will be required per ADEC Correspondence”. This far exceeds the requirements of EPA Method 1 (maximum of 24 on method 1 compliant location). Can you provide the reason why ADEC is requesting so many? We can see that some of the locations have 25 point and 35 point matrix, but nothing with 40.

Additional sampling points are required due to the configuration of the boilers. See email file: "Email - ADEC PM Source Test.pdf".

For the remote locations, is there a price sheet for the travel, gear shipment, lodging, and meal costs?

Please see Base Support Letters for Eareckson, Wake, and King Salmon, as has been provided in the original supporting documentation, the first response to questions, and this response to questions.

Schedule B - it appears that CLINs 0071-0115 do not reference "AA-AE" but are listed in the base and option years. Is the intent to provide a price for each year or simply one cost in the total price.

A revised Schedule B will be provided. Provide a price for each year as indicated. Option may be awarded up to 5 times.

Schedule B - there appears to be a discrepancy with reference to CLIN for Plan "Update, Solid Waste/QRP Business PWS Para 2.1.27.2".

CLIN 0080 is referenced in column A, and 7801 is referenced in the base and option years. Please advise.

A revised Schedule B will be provided.

27 Would the Government consider a week extension to the deadline due to the restrictions associated with COVID-19? Amendment 3 will revise the proposals due date to 1 May 2020.

Section 2.1.8 – Reporting, EPCRA – Do the reporting requirements for Wake, Koke’e, and Ka’ala require travel to these sites?

Travel is not required to these sites.

Regarding Clear Air Force Base (CAS), it is clear that a Title V renewal will be required under PWS paragraph 2.1.11.1. It is not clear whether any other regulatory reports or support will be required for CAS as a component of the 611th. Please clarify whether CAS is regarded as part of the 611th and whether other support tasks in the PWS would be expected for CAS.

Clear Air Station (CAS) is not a component of the 611th. Please see "Table 2. 611th Sites."

Table 16 to the PWS contains two line items that mention/include a great many facilities, but most of these facilities are not mentioned by name in the text of the PWS. The first line of Table 16 is for the Comprehensive Stationary AEI. The second is for the PTE Update. Please clarify whether these documents are to include all the facilities listed in Table 16 for each of these items, or if these tasks will only apply to specific facilities on the list.

As shown in Table 2 of the PWS, the 611th is responsible for maintaining environmental compliance for these sites. The AEI for 611th shall be comprehensive, and thus shall include all active 611 sites.

SAM, NPDES/Other Waste Water for JBER is listed for both CLIN 37 and 97. CLIN 97 is an optional task. Optional tasks MAY be exercised up to five times each.

32 SAM, Storm Water, MS4 for JBER is listed for both CLIN 40 and 103. CLIN 103 is an Optional Task. Optional tasks MAY be exercised up to five times each.

33 SAM, Storm Water, MSGP for JBER is listed in CLIN 41 and 106. CLIN 106 is an optional task. Optional tasks MAY be exercised up to five times each.

Questions/Answers

34 Recordkeeping Air Title V and Other Permits is cited as PWS 2.1.13 (CLIN 50); however, the PWS item for 2.1.13 is Recordkeeping Air Records Review (CLIN 89). Further, it appears that this task is a one-time event, not something to be repeated in all years.

CLIN 50 has been revised to Recordkeeping, Air, Records Review.

35 CLIN 0071 (optional task), WAI only, appears to be a one-time event (Table 35), not something to be repeated in all years. CLIN 0071 is an optional task. Optional tasks MAY be exercised up to five times each.

36 CLIN 0072 (optional task), KSA only, appears to be a one-time event (Table 35), not something to be repeated in all years. CLIN 0072 is an optional task. Optional tasks MAY be exercised up to five times each.

37 CLIN 0073 (optional task), 611 only, appears to be a one-time event (Table 35), not something to be repeated in all years. Also, this does not appear to be an optional task and it goes with 0056.

CLIN 0073 is an optional task. Optional tasks MAY be exercised up to five times each.

38 CLIN 0074 (optional task) appears to be a one-time event (Table 35), not something to be repeated in all years. CLIN 0074 is an optional task. Optional tasks MAY be exercised up to five times each.

Also, there are several references to scope items in the PWS, that do not have a corresponding CLIN. For example, PWS 2.9 – there is a heading for Permits, Storage Tanks, but there is no scope description or corresponding CLIN, therefore, we assume this task will not be required under the contract.

Paragraph 2.9 has no requirements.

PWS 2.8 POL has an introductory paragraph citing a long list of management tasks associated with POL systems, however, there are no CLINs that align with this scope element. Should we assume that if there is not a corresponding CLIN, that the work will not be funded/performed.

Paragraph 2.8 has no requirements. It is an introductory paragraph.