02-11-20 (00201-20) Sehlhorst to Interested Parties ICP 89303319REM000034 DRFP.pdf

February 11, 2020 EMCBC-00202-20

To: Interested Parties

IDAHO CLEANUP PROJECT (ICP) – DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

The Department of Energy (DOE) is releasing the Draft Request for Proposal (RFP), Solicitation No. 89303319REM000034, pertaining to the ICP procurement for review. The purpose of the Draft RFP is to solicit questions and comments from all interested parties, and to assist the DOE in developing a Final RFP for this procurement.

DOE IS NOT REQUESTING PROPOSALS AT THIS TIME, AND INTERESTED

PARTIES SHALL NOT SUBMIT PROPOSALS IN RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT RFP.

DOE WILL NOT EVALUATE ANY PROPOSALS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE

DRAFT RFP. PROPOSALS SHALL BE SUBMITTED ONLY IN RESPONSE TO THE

FINAL RFP, CURRENTLY ANTICIPATED TO BE ISSUED IN SPRING 2020.

DOE hereby invites all interested parties to thoroughly examine the Draft RFP and the accompanying procurement website (https://www.emcbc.doe.gov/SEB/icp) in their entirety and to submit comments in writing to the following email address: ICP@emcbc.doe.gov.

During the development of the Final RFP, DOE will consider the comments received from interested parties in response to the Draft RFP.

Consistent with the EM End State Contracting Model (ESCM), the ICP DRFP contemplates an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract under which Cost Reimbursement

(CR) and/or Fixed Price (FP) task orders may be issued. The contract ordering period will be

10 years, including a 90-day transition period. The contract is estimated to be worth up to approximately $6.4 billion over the ten-year ordering period, which includes the issuance of task orders that shall not exceed five years beyond the end of the contract ordering period.

EM’s ESCM employs a two-step process using a competitive qualifications-based RFP for selection of the Offeror representing the best value to the Government, and subsequent post-award negotiations of discrete scopes of work through effective partnering on a task order basis. EM is pursuing a streamlined selection process under this ESCM whereby a best value selection process will include three technical factors (key personnel, past performance, and management approach), along with a cost factor that includes contract transition costs, key

Department of Energy

Environmental Management

Consolidated Business Center

550 Main Street, Room 7-010

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

(513) 246-0500 https://www.emcbc.doe.gov/SEB/icp mailto:ICP@emcbc.doe.gov

Interested Parties -2- EMCBC-00202-20 personnel costs, fully burdened labor rates, and fee. In particular, DOE is seeking feedback from interested parties on the following:

1. Are there any questions, concerns or input for DOE’s consideration regarding how the streamlined selection process under the EM ESCM has been incorporated throughout the Section L instructions and/or the Section M evaluation criteria?

2. Does your company have any input regarding the level of detail requested within each Evaluation Factor and/or the relative importance of the Evaluation Factors that DOE should consider in making this contractor selection?

3. Are there any questions or concerns regarding the Section B DOE-B-2015 Task Order Fee/Profit Ceiling clause, and/or the associated Section L instructions regarding fee and profit ceilings to be proposed by the Offeror?

4. Is the Section B Performance Management Incentive clause clear and understandable, including the application thereof within the Implementation and ICP Essential Missions Task Orders? If not, what is unclear and what improvements can be made?

5. Are the Section H workforce transition and hiring clauses clear to potential Offerors? If not, what is unclear and/or how can these clauses be improved? Also, please note the terms defined in H.3 Definitions under an IDIQ contract construct as it relates to the workforce transition and hiring clause requirements.

6. Is the Subcontracted Work clause in Section H clear and do you have any concerns with being able to meet the stated percentage?

7. Are there any questions, concerns or input for DOE’s consideration regarding the Section H Organizational Conflict of Interest - Affiliate clause?

8. Section J includes draft Requests for Task Order Proposals (RTPs) for the Implementation, ICP Essential Missions, and Integrated Waste Treatment Unit (IWTU)

Operations Task Orders. Although these three task orders will not be evaluated under the streamlined source selection procedure for the ICP procurement, DOE is interested in any questions, concerns or input for post contract award consideration. DOE specifically requests industry feedback for a suitable Task Order type for the IWTU Operations, with the objective to complete radioactive waste processing operations.

9. Are the page limitations included in Section L of the Draft RFP for the Technical and

Management Proposal (Volume II) sufficient? If not, please provide input.

10. Are the definitions of “newly formed entity” and “teaming subcontractor” within Section

L.9 (a) clear?

11. The past performance factor includes an instruction related to parent or affiliated company past performance. Do you have any input on this proposal preparation instruction?

12. Are the instructions within Section L.16 Proposal Preparation Instructions, Volume III – Cost and Fee Proposal, and the Attachment L-6 Cost and Fee/Profit Elements Worksheet clear and consistent with each other? Do you have any input regarding the risks and/or benefits of including minimum qualifications for the DOE provided labor categories?

Interested Parties -3- EMCBC-00202-20

13. Are there any additional specific technical or programmatic documents and/or information that you think would be helpful and should be posted to the EMCBC Acquisition website’s documents library in order to assist in preparation of proposals?

DOE does not anticipate including documents that would require a request for Controlled Unclassified Information under a non-disclosure agreement.

14. Does the Draft RFP contain any potential restrictive barriers to competition? Do barriers exist (DOE imposed or otherwise) that would hinder your firm from participating in this acquisition? Which, if any, of the requirements contained in the DRFP do you believe are unnecessary or represent barriers to successful contract performance?

15. DOE is envisioning a 30-day proposal preparation period once the Final RFP is released.

Is 30 days sufficient?

16. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions?

Interested parties will have until March 6, 2020, to submit written comments regarding the Draft RFP. All comments shall be submitted in the Microsoft Excel format provided on the procurement website, separated by RFP section. Please do not make any changes to the Microsoft Excel formatting with the exception of adding rows as needed. DOE will not respond to or post on the procurement website any questions or comments pertaining to the Draft RFP; however, DOE will consider comments when preparing the Final RFP. Interested parties will be given the opportunity to submit questions and comments in writing for DOE response once the Final RFP is issued.

Fluor Idaho, LLC (Fluor) and Spectra Tech Inc. (STI) are currently performing the services listed in the Draft RFP for DOE Idaho. Fluor is the ICP Core incumbent contractor performing under Contract No. Contract No DE-EM0004083. STI is the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Licensed Facilities incumbent contractor performing under Contract No.

DE-EM0003976. The new contract resulting from this acquisition will replace the ICP Core

Contract awarded to Fluor, and will include requirements from the NRC Licensed Facilities, with the exception of the Fort St. Vrain physical security services, which will be procured as a Small Business Set Aside.

The goal of the ESCM and the master IDIQ ICP Contract is to achieve measurable results toward completion of the DOE-EM mission at the INL Site, including the Fort St. Vrain facility in Colorado, by accomplishing the maximum amount of environmental cleanup within the 10-year ordering period at the best value to the U.S. taxpayer. The Contractor will be required to perform work under this master IDIQ contract in compliance with current and future milestones in the 1995 Idaho Settlement Agreement court order, the 2008 Agreement to Implement court order, the Comprehensive Environmental Cleanup Conservation and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). It is

DOE’s expectation and a fundamental premise of the ESCM that DOE will partner with the contractor after award to openly negotiate Task Orders that provide the most reduction of environmental risk and EM financial liability to advance the INL Site’s cleanup status as far as is reasonably achievable toward the ultimate completion of the INL Site cleanup mission.

Interested Parties -4- EMCBC-00202-20

Sincerely, Lori A. Sehlhorst Contracting Officer

Enclosure:

Draft RFP Solicitation No. 89303319REM000034