AMEND0003_70Z08725RJUNE2824423_RFIs.pdf

AMEND 0003 RFP 70Z08725RJUNE28424423

Alaska Environmental Remediation Services IDIQ

Project No. 28424423

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES

1 2

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

10/28/2025 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

CONTRACT SPECIALIST

USCG, CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT JUNEAU

709 WEST 9TH STREET, ROOM 817

JUNEAU, AK 99801

CONTRACTING OFFICER

USCG, CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIT JUNEAU

709 WEST 9TH STREET, ROOM 817

JUNEAU, AK 99801

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (NO., STREET, COUNTY, STATE AND ZIP CODE)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

70Z08725RJUNE28424423

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09/30/2025

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE REFERENCED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET

FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (SPECIFY TYPE OF MODIFICATION AND AUTHORITY)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return 1 copy to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (ORGANIZED BY UCF SECTION HEADINGS, INCLUDING SOLICITATION/CONTRACT SUBJECT MATTER WHERE FEASIBLE.)

TASK ORDER REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO. 70Z08725RJUNE2824423 Alaska Environmental Remediation Services

A. This amendment is issued to answer RFI’s 25- 51, Adds 52.209-7, and changes RFP Section L5.2.

B. PROPOSAL DUE DATES EXTENDED FROM 11/30/2025 to 12/02/2025.

C. PLEASE RETURN A SIGNED COPY OF THIS AMENDMENT WITH YOUR PROPOSAL.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or Print)

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

Cheryl A. Berry, CONTRACTING OFFICER, USCG

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

16B UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

AMENDMENT 0003 ANSWERS RFIS 25-51, ADD PROVISION 52.209-7, AND

CHANGE MINIMUM PROJECT AMOUNT FOR L5.2 (A) FROM $1M TO $500K.

INSERT PROVISION:

52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (JOCT 2018)

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision— “Administrative proceeding” means a non-judicial process that is adjudicatory in nature in order to make a determination of fault or liability (e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission Administrative Proceedings, Civilian Board of Contract Appeals Proceedings, and Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals Proceedings). This includes administrative proceeding at the Federal and State level but only in connection with performance of a Federal contract or grant. It does not include agency actions such as contract audits, site visits, corrective plans, or inspection of deliverables.

“Federal contracts and grants with total value greater than $10,000,000” means—

(1) The total value of all current, active contracts and grants, including all priced options; and

(2) The total value of all current, active orders including all priced options under indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity, 8(a), or requirements contracts (including task and delivery and multiple-award Schedules).

“Principal” means an officer, director, owner, partner, or a person having primary management or supervisory responsibilities within a business entity (e.g., general manager; plant manager; head of a division or business segment; and similar positions).

(b) The offeror [_] has [_] does not have current active Federal contracts and grants with total value greater than $10,000,000.

(c) If the offeror checked “has” in paragraph (b) of this provision, the offeror represents, by submission of this offer, that the information it has entered in the Integrity Information module or section of SAM.gov is current, accurate, and complete as of the date of submission of this offer with regard to the following information: (1) Whether the offeror, and/or any of its principals, has or has not, within the last five years, in connection with the award to, or performance by the offeror of a Federal contract or grant, been the subject of a proceeding, at the Federal or State level that resulted in any of the following dispositions: (i) In a criminal proceeding, a conviction.

(ii) In a civil proceeding, a finding of fault and liability that results in the payment of a monetary fine, penalty, reimbursement, restitution, or damages of $5,000 or more.

(iii) In an administrative proceeding, a finding of fault and liability that results in— (A) The payment of a monetary fine or penalty of $5,000 or more; or

(B) The payment of a reimbursement, restitution, or damages in excess of $100,000.

(iv) In a criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, a disposition of the matter by consent or compromise with an acknowledgment of fault by the Contractor if the proceeding could have led to any of the outcomes specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii), or (c)(1)(iii) of this provision.

25. RFP L.5.3, Past Performance states under “Note: The Government prefers CPARS and requests that PPQs only be submitted if a non- Government project is submitted.”

For relevant Government projects that are 75% complete but have yet to receive a CPARS, would the Government allow recently completed PPQs in lieu of a

CPARS?

A. Yes, as stated in L5.3 Provide CPARS evaluations (interim or final) for the three projects submitted in Prior Experience. If no CPARS evaluation exists, then provide a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), utilizing Attachment 3 to this RFQ.

26. L5.2 Prior Experience states “The Offeror must have been the Prime Contractor or Joint Venture partner on the project.”

As a small business, we regularly perform as a subcontractor. Would the USCG allow prior experience as a subcontractor, as long as all of the other requirements are met?

A. No, the Government understands the question; however, Section L5.2 states:

The Offeror must have been the Prime Contractor or Joint Venture partner on the project.

27. Would the U.S. Coast Guard consider expanding the defined geographic area of performance from Alaska to include the continental United States and its territories?

A. No. As stated, projects must be executed in Alaska due to the unique logistical challenges associated with working in USCG’s Arctic District.

28. Would the U.S. Coast Guard consider expanding the minimum project value threshold to include projects with a minimum value of $500,000?

A. L5.2 a – AMENDED Strike $1,000,000 replace with $500,000.

29. Would the U.S. Coast Guard consider accepting Alaska state and local government projects that meet the requirements outlined in the RFP?

A. Yes, as stated in L5.2: At least two of the three projects submitted shall be for the Federal government.

30. Does the term “Offeror” include both prime contractor and named teaming partners?

A. Offeror means any entity that submits an offer in response to a solicitation.

See response to Q 31 below to further clarify.

31. Can prior experience examples be provided by the prime contractor and/or named teaming partner?

A. Yes, if teaming partner is named. If the (2) contractors are forming an official joint venture, projects cited under experience must include at least one project from each member.

32. As this contract will have FFP task orders, please reconsider Offeror’s to not provide a current, within the last three years, third-party audit supporting proposed Overhead in accordance with FAR Part 31.2 as this FAR directly correlates to cost plus task orders and not FFP task orders.

A. Updated see Amendment 0002 Revised L and M.

33. Does the Government intent to include formatting requirements (i.e., page size, margins, font, font sizing, etc.)?

34. Are Offeror’s allowed to provide cover graphics, table of contents, glossary, and section tabs within their proposal? If so, can these pages be excluded from page limitations and be optional per Offeror’s preference?

35. As the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has ruled in favor of allowing the evaluation of experience to consider past performance information regarding affiliated companies, will the Government allow it?

A. The USCG does not anticipate using this approach, refer to M5.2 and M5.3 for evaluation criteria.

36. Does the government expect to receive one deliverable (file) with both AK Environmental Proposal and Business/Price Proposal requirements combined; or does the Government except these to be two separate deliverables (files)?

37. Will the Government clarify if Offerors are to include all available CPARS for each presented project or if Offerors are to include only the most current within the past performance section?

A. If the question is whether the Offeror may submit an Interim CPARS evaluation when a Final CPARS evaluation is available, then no the Government requests the Final CPARS. If only the Interim CPARS is available, then yes it is acceptable to submit Interim CPARS.

38. Due to the ongoing DCAA processing backlogs, will the Government consider removing the “within the last three-years” requirement for third-party audit supporting proposed overhead in accordance with FAR Part 31.2?

A. Updated see Amendment 0002 Revised L and M

39. The RFP states Offerors to include a completed SF 1442 within their proposal.

There was no SF 1442 provided to Offerors. Does the Government intend to release a SF 1442 before proposal submission or is the provided SF 33 sufficient?

A. Updated see Amendment 0002 Revised L and M

40. Section 1. “Project Number” requires offerors to provide the name of the project and location (city and state) with each past performance project and then again in Section i. “Contract/Task Order Title” and Section v. “Location of Work.” Did the government intend for Offerors to present this information twice or should Project Number be the Contract/TO number for each project?

41. Can the government please clarify titles for both Cheryl Berry and John Wright?

A. Cheryl Berry – Senior Field Contracting Officer, John Wright Contracting Officer.

42. Would the Government consider a candidate with a non-technical BA degree plus more than 30 years of directly relevant environmental remediation and sampling experience—supported by QEP certification and substantial specialized training—to meet or exceed the education requirement for the Environmental Scientist / Engineer / Specialist position?

A. Negative, no change to requirement.

43. Section K in the solicitation does not include 52.209-13, 52.209-7, and 52.219-4.

Are these clauses applicable? If so, should the offeror download copies to provide with its proposal, or will the Government provide these clauses in an amendment?

A. Strike, 52.209-13, 52.219-4. 52.209-7 incorporated into this amendment, thank you for bringing this to the attention of the USCG.

44. Section L5.3 states, “Each CPARS evaluation and questionnaire submitted must include all the following information:

a. Period of performance

b. Name of agency/company for whom work was performed.

c. Contract/Task Order title and award date.

d. Name, address, and current telephone number of engineer/contract administrator/contracting officer.

e. Identifies currently proposed personnel which were involved.

Q: Some of the abovementioned items are not included as specific fields on the CPARS evaluations (e.g., award date, proposed personnel, etc.). Are Offerors allowed to provide those details in addition to the CPARS?

A. Yes, limited to only the information request for each CPARS/PPQ submission.

45. Also, for item d. above, does the Government require names, addresses, and current telephone for all three positions or is one of the three positions satisfactory? CPARS evaluations often have the Contracting Officer listed and not the Contract Administrator or Engineer.

A. Contracting Officer is sufficient.

46. Section L5.2, Prior Experience states that, “The Offeror must have been the

Prime Contractor or Joint Venture partner on the project.” Would the Government consider allowing Offerors to use a key subcontractor/teaming partner's prime experience for one of the project examples?

A. A name teaming partner may be used, no key subcontractors.

47. Do references to the Offeror include team subcontractors?

A. Offers are Prime or Named JV.

48. Seed Project – Eldred Rock Site Characterization and Arctic District Environmental Support

a. For the analytes being sampled, are they the ones included in Attachment

2.1 “Alternate Cleanup Levels for Soil at USCG Light Stations in Southeast Alaska?”

A. ACoCs are identified in the attachments, you will need to review more than just the ACL.

b. Is there an on-site staging area for the IDW?

A. Yes.

c. Is a QAPP required? If yes, is it a UFP-QAPP format or a standard QAPP format (with a Sampling and Analyses Plan [SAP] and a Field Sampling Plan [FSP])?

A. Either are acceptable per Alaska regulations.

49. Bonding Requirements

a. Will performance and payments (P&P) bonds be required for all task orders?

A. The Government anticipates P&P bonds for Construction Task

Orders in accordance with 40 U.S.C. chapter 31.

b. Will P&P bonds be required for only constructions-related tasks/costs

A. See above.

50. Page 63, L5.2 Prior Experience

a. For item a (Remedial Action or Remedial Action in support of a

Construction Project), would the USCG consider reducing the minimum contract value to $500,000 executed by the offeror?

A. See response to Question 28.

b. For item b (Environmental Remedial Investigation), is there a minimum contract value for work executed by the offeror?

A. There is no minimum contract value.

c. For both items a and b, can experience be shown for a subcontractor who is a key part of the Offeror team for projects where the subcontractor served as prime contractor?

A. Government is evaluating the Prime, either as a standalone firm or as a part of a JV.

d. If team subcontractor experience can be shown, will it be given equal rating consideration to a project provided by the proposing prime contractor?

A. See response above.

51. Would the U.S. Coast Guard consider past performance projects in which the Offeror served as a key subcontractor to a large-business prime contractor, where the prime contractor’s successful performance relied on the Offeror’s specialized expertise, and this contribution is clearly acknowledged within the associated CPARs?

A. As stated in L5.2 :The Offeror must have been the Prime Contractor or Joint Venture partner on the project. As stated in L5.3: Provide CPARS evaluations (interim or final) for the three projects submitted in Prior Experience. USCG acknowledges the question, no change.