B08.03 Q&A 07142020.pdf

1. XXXXXX is a SME headquartered in Canada which already has fulfilled contracts with the US Army and US Navy and either has satisfied or will be able to satisfy the requirements listed regarding being actively registered in the System for Award Management (SAM), having no active exclusions, and completing the FAR and DFARS representations and certifications. We have not identified any exclusion of foreign companies in our review of the notice materials, and would just like to confirm that with you before proceeding.

This requirement is being competed on a “full & open basis with no exclusions”. Barring no statutory reason for an offeror to otherwise not be eligible for award, foreign offerors are permitted.

2. When is the deadline for Questions and Answers? Is there a specified process for the Q&A? I cannot find any information on this in the documents provided.

Section L has been updated to address the deadline for submission of questions. Questions are due by 11:59am CST 7 August 2020.

3. As a small business we intend to submit a proposal to this request. We note that the work is to be done at the proposers’ facility. We intend to do so, however, our facility that can process up to seven tons/day of hydrocarbon wastes is located in Germany. Will we need to request a waiver to use this facility? All the wastes for the various mixtures would be purchased in Germany, shredded and processed. We can also process the PWP disks. If we are successful and awarded a contract, could they be sent to that location?

The Government is prepared to ship the disks to any location necessary should a successful awardee be capable of processing them as part of the effort. Since the solicitation clearly stipulates that performance will occur at the offeror’s determined location, there’s no “requirement” to waive as far as a facility or location is concerned.

4. On page 23 of 32, Section 1. Proposal Submission Requirements (e), the instructions explicitly state to physically separate the Offeror’s submission into "two (2) physically separate volumes". The chart on page 24 of 32 however references five (5) volumes. Would you like the Offeror to submit five (5) physically separate volumes (i.e., 5 separate documents attached to the submission email, named using the five (5) volumes on page 24), or would the below be organization be compliant assuming that you would simply like to ensure the Offeror’s pricing is kept completely separate:

Submission Document 1: “Volume I” (Technical Proposal)

- Volume I: Technical Approach

- Volume II: Corporate Experience

- Volume III: Small Business Participation

- Volume V: Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents, and Certifications / Representations

Submission Document 2: “Volume II” (Pricing Proposal)

- Volume IV: Price

Section L has been updated to correct this mistake. The submission should be separated into five (5) separate volumes.

5. The system that we currently have engineered is larger than the 10 TPD referenced in the RFP.

It is possible for us to re-engineer to a smaller size, but we would not have sufficient time to do so and cost prior to the RFP deadline. Would it be acceptable for us to submit the system we have for technical review with the understanding that we may need to adjust the size and price if we were successful.

The Government cannot prevent an offeror from submitting a proposal, however any proposal that does not meet the minimum research objectives would not be deemed technically acceptable. There is no opportunity for a proposed solution to be adjusted and re-priced at a later date because that would violate the Competition in Contracting Act.