Attachment 2 - Technical Evaluation.pdf
PDF 302 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Hazardous Waste Removal
- Solicitation number
- 2099CH26R00001
About this file
This document contains the evaluation criteria and rating scales for proposal evaluation in a federal contract solicitation for hazardous waste management services with the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB).
The solicitation evaluates proposals across four factors: Technical (Factor A), Corporate Experience (Factor B), Past Performance (Factor C), and Price (Factor D). The technical proposal must address the contractor's capability to profile, package, remove, and dispose of hazardous spent waste, expired chemicals, and cannabis waste from the TTB Laboratory; develop a plan/schedule for hazardous waste currently in storage in Beltsville, MD; provide emergency pickup and response services for complex spills; meet packaging, transportation, and documentation requirements; provide waste minimization guidance; and supply online access to hazardous waste documentation for EPA Biennial reporting. Technical ratings are Excellent (exceeds specifications), Acceptable (may not meet approach but can mitigate shortcomings), or Unacceptable (does not meet standards and cannot mitigate). Corporate Experience evaluation requires documentation of the contractor's and any subcontractor's experience with laboratory waste packaging, labeling, removal, and disposal, plus knowledge of EPA, DOT, DEA, state, and local regulations, including EPA and DOT identification numbers. Past Performance requires submission of three relevant contracts from the past five years with contact information, preferably of similar size, scope, and complexity, with ratings based on reference quality and performance risk level. Price evaluation determines fairness and reasonableness relative to technical requirements, with the provision that all non-price factors combined equal price in weight, allowing award to higher-priced offerors if technical merit justifies the difference.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Factor A:
Technical
The technical proposal shall address the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and demonstrates the contractor's capability to meet TTB's requirements. The technical proposal shall specifically address the Contractor's:
a) Plan to profile, package, remove, and dispose of hazardous spent waste, expired chemicals and cannabis waste produced by the TTB Laboratory.
b) Plan/schedule to package, remove, and dispose of hazardous waste currently waiting for disposition in Beltsville, MD
c) Capability to provide emergency pickup services,
d) Capability to provide emergency response and clean up services for complex spills,
e) Plan for meeting packaging, transportation, and documentation requirements outlined in the PWS.
f) Plan to provide assistance, guidance and information on waste minimization and consolidation procedures.
g) Plan to provide online access to view and retrieve hazardous waste documentation for EPA Biennial reporting.
Rating:
Excellent The technical proposal meets or exceeds the services and needs specified by TTB in the solicitation.
Acceptable The offeror may not meet the technical approach, timetables or personal resources as specified in the proposal but are able to address how they will mitigate their shortcomings through other methods.
Unacceptable Does not meet standards as specified in the solicitation and the offeror is unable to mitigate their shortcomings through other means.
Factor B:
Corporate Experience
The proposal shall provide sufficient documentation demonstrating the contractor's experience with the packaging, labeling, removal and disposal of laboratory waste and knowledge of EPA, DOT, DEA, state, and local regulations for packaging, labeling, and transporting waste. Documentation shall include contractor's and subcontractor’s (if a subcontractor is used) EPA identification number for treating, storing and disposing hazardous waste and the DOT identification number for transporting hazardous materials.
Rating: Excellent The technical proposal meets or exceeds the experience needed to provide services as specified by TTB in the solicitation.
Acceptable The technical proposal received meets the experience needed to provide services as specified by TTB in the solicitation.
Unacceptable Does not meet standards as specified in the solicitation and the offeror is unable to mitigate their shortcomings through other means.
Factor C:
Past Performance
The contractor shall provide a list of three (3) of the most relevant contracts regarding the services listed in the solicitation, either completed or on-going covering the past five years and contact information that shall include a point of contact, address, phone number, facsimile number, and e-mail address. Most relevant are contracts that are currently in process for services performed relevant work similar in size, scope and/or complexity to the service requirements listed in the PWS. Contracts listed include those entered into by the federal government, agencies of state and local governments, foreign governments and commercial customers.
Rating: Excellent Performance references received are exceptional. There are no adverse indications of performance. Performance Risk Level: Low.
Acceptable There are some adverse indications of performance; however, the offeror addressed how they will mitigate these same issues in the future. Performance Risk Level: Moderate.
Unacceptable Services performed, however at a poor level or references not submitted.
Performance Risk Level: High.
Factor D:
Price
Rating:
Acceptable The price is fair and reasonable considering the quality and delivery of technical requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement.
Unacceptable The price is not fair and reasonable considering the quality and delivery of technical requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement.
All evaluation factors other than price when combined are equal to price. The government may award to a higher-priced offeror if the technical merit outweighs the price difference.
| Offeror Name: |
| Signature of TEP Members |
| Blank Page |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .