JOTFOC_BCA HCA signed_1.pdf

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 1 of 13

WBR 1406.303-1 Template 1 (03/2019)

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN

COMPETITION

In accordance with FAR 6.302, the proposed contractual action is pursuant to the statutory authority identified in paragraph 4. This template is required for actions over the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (unless the procurement is acquired as a limited source IAW FAR 8.405-6 or is an Exception to Fair Opportunity IAW FAR 16.505(b)(2)).

1. Agency and Contracting Activity (FAR 6.303-2(b)(1)).

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Upper Colorado Basin

2. Nature/Description of Action (FAR 6.303-2(b)(2)).

A sole source, firm fixed price construction contract for approximately $24,100,000.00 is being pursued for a PVC geo-composite liner system that includes an intermediate tensioning profile system to install on the steel face of the El Vado Dam. This contract will be awarded in two phases. Phase one of this contract will be for consultation input to BOR regarding the tasks listed in the Statement of Objectives (SOO). The period of performance for phase one will be from award through September of 2020 and will provide consulting support to the Technical Service Center (TSC) design team so they can complete the design and specifications of this project.

Phase two is an optional CLIN that will be based on the specifications and drawings that will be developed through phase one. Phase two work will include grouting, repair and prep work of the dam prior to installation of the liner that will also occur during this phase. A complete request for proposal including a Statement of Work (SOW), drawings and specifications will be provided to the contractor for re-negotiation of phase two. The period of performance for phase two will be after congressional approval of funds for the option estimated to be February of 2021. Work will continue for phase two through August 2023.

3. Description of Supplies/Services (FAR 6.303-2(b)(3)).

Background: El Vado Dam is located on the Chama River, approximately 10 Miles Southwest of Tierra Amarillo New Mexico. The dam was originally constructed in 1935 by the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District (MRGCD) and has been designated a New Mexico Civil Engineering Landmark. Since taking over responsibility of the dam in 1952, Reclamation has rehabilitated the spillway, which included work on the spillway gate and original outlet works near the center of the dam. Reclamation also constructed an emergency spillway between 1954-1957.

The primary purpose of the reservoir is to provide storage for supplemental irrigation to the Middle Rio Grande Valley. The reservoir is also used for storage of San Juan-Chama Project water for irrigation, municipal and industrial uses, hydroelectric power, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. El Vado Reservoir contains a total storage capacity of about 185,770 (live capacity) acre-feet and is fed from flows of the Rio

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 2 of 13

(03/2019)

Chama. The reservoir also receives water in transit, imported from the San Juan River Basin in Colorado and regulated by the upstream Heron Dam and Reservoir.

The main features of the El Vado Dam is the steel faceplate on the upstream face, a cutoff wall at the upstream toe of the dam and a left abutment constructed on an ancient landslide mass that consists of large rock blocks separated by open joints and fractures.

The steel faceplate was constructed using approximately 8.3-feet tall by 24.4-feet wide steel panels that are approximately 0.25-inches thick. The individual faceplate panels were welded together to form a continuous liner across the upstream face of the dam. The steel faceplate is secured to a concrete plinth along the upstream cutoff wall alignment.

Vertical expansion joints are positioned between each of the faceplate sections at 25-foot centers. The vertical expansion joints are continuous, extending from the upstream toe of the dam to the base of the curved parapet wall/wave deflector, and consist of a V-shaped channel about 6-inches deep and about 6-inches wide. The expansion joints were bolted and then welded to adjacent faceplate panels.

The open joints and fractures in the left abutment allow large amounts of water pass through the foundation. The seepage in the left abutment could erode the embankment where it contacts the landslide mass, which could lead to failure of the dam.

Due to the location and the construction methods as well as temperature related expansion, contraction and corrosion have caused cracks and tears to occur in the steel faceplate. These cracks and tears have been exasperated over the life of the dam through standard reservoir operation and hydraulic loading, differential settlement and point loading at the base of the liner. The cracks and tears mostly occur in the base of the expansion joint channels or where the expansion joint was welded to the steel faceplates.

New cracks and tears are typically noted by a spike in the seepage rates measured downstream. In 2010 and 2011, new cracks caused seepage measurements increased by more than 5 cubic feet per second in the 24-inch Parshall downstream flume.

There are also gaps and voids that have formed under the faceplate that are unknown in size. Cut outs were created and cameras inserted that showed a variety of gaps under the steel faceplate found to range from 1 inch to 12 inches in depth. These gaps will need to be filled in and corrected before the geomembrane liner can be attached.

Constructability Review & Alternative Decision: A complete analysis of the material determination, testing, and grouting repair is identified in the Corrective Action Study (CAS) (Attachment One). This report evaluated and analyzed the alternatives to reduce seepage in both the embankment and left abutment, and thus increase dam safety.

Numerous alternatives were presented during the CAS with the following six being evaluated and analyzed to determine the best course of action that would meet the Government’s minimum need:

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 3 of 13

(03/2019)

ALTERNATIVE BENEFITS DETERMINATION

Alt. 1 – Full geomembrane lining over existing steel faceplate; with left abutment seepage blanket (later adjusted to grout curtain at/under existing plinth).

Full coverage of the steel faceplate with complete reduction in seepage

Would have required the removal of a large volume of sediment at the base of the dam. This would become a significant environmental challenge taking over 4 years to complete and over $35 million in construction costs.

Alt. 1.A – Partial geomembrane on existing steel faceplate, with left abutment seepage blanket (later adjusted to grout curtain at/under existing plinth).

No disturbance of existing sediment, reduced schedule, and reduced cost from Alt. 1.

Potential for some continuous seepage into the embankment (dam) from the 15% exposed steel faceplate. Strong assumption that the sediment will prevent seepage. The project will take 3 years to complete and under $30 million in total construction costs.

Alt. 2 – Reinforced concrete lining, with left abutment seepage blanket (later adjusted to grout curtain at/under existing plinth)

Alternative lining system from Geomembrane with an expected longer lifespan.

High probability of crack/flaws developing in the lining system requiring constant repairs. Would take more than 4 years to complete and over $42 million in construction cost.

Alt. 3 – Embankment cutoff wall (an impenetrable concrete wall through the center of the dam embankment).

Embankment stabilization and very long lifespan.

Considered a final solution.

Very high cost and long construction duration.

Potential for dam failure during construction. Potential for cracks/flaws from landslide movement or dam shifting. Over 4 years to complete and over $100 million in construction cost.

Alt. 4 – Dam breach/abandonment (removing the spillway so the river will follow natural course with the remainder of the dam sitting in place).

Inexpensive and short construction duration

No water storage because it would reduce the reservoir to 1/3 full. Does not meet water user’s needs. 1 Year completion and less than $1 million in construction costs.

Alt. 5 - Reservoir Restriction 6775 (drained reservoir). This is an alternative that is

No cost or construction duration

Limited water storage. Does not meet water user’s needs.

No construction period. No construction costs.

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 4 of 13

(03/2019) standard for review for dam safety but is never utilized.

No long-term project benefits. When compared to lost benefits vs no cost.

Alt. 6 - Reservoir Restriction 6844, with Spillway Modifications. This is an alternative that is standard for review for dam safety but is never utilized.

No cost or construction duration for embankment.

Limited water storage. Does not meet water user’s needs.

No construction period for embankment. No construction costs for embankment. No long-term project benefits.

When compared to lost benefits vs no cost.

The findings of the CAS indicated that Alternative 1A, to install a partial geomembrane liner over the existing steel faceplate after grouting is completed to fill the gaps and voids between existing backfill and steel plates, meets the minimum needs of the Government.

During the CAS and for market research purposes, a field trial was conducted to evaluate numerous geomembrane liner products to identify suitable products for an exposed installation over the existing steel faceplate. The solicitation for the field trial required that any proposed geomembrane would need to be resistant to ultra-violet (UV) light exposure, have a long service-life, be puncture resistant from impacts or projections beneath the lining system, tolerate ice loading, have suitable thermal expansion/contraction properties to accommodate temperature differences between the geomembrane liner and the steel faceplate, and be flexible considering the potential for future embankment movements and deformations.

The geomembrane portion represents approximately 70% of the work to be performed in the contract and approximately 30% of the work will be for repairs to the existing steel faceplate where cracks and tares are present, backfill grouting and some excavation.

4. Statutory Authority Permitting Other than Full and Open Competition (FAR 6.303- 2(b)(4)). (Check one)

Authority FAR Coverage Application ☐ 41 U.S.C. 1901 FAR 13.501 Only one responsible source using Simplified

Acquisition Procedures (above SAT but below $7M) ☐ 41 U.S.C. 1903 FAR 13.501 Special emergency procurement authority

☒ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(1) FAR 6.302-1 Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements

☐ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(1) FAR 6.302-1(c) Application for brand-name descriptions

☐ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(2) FAR 6.302-2 Unusual and compelling urgency

☐ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(3) FAR 6.302-3 Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental or research capability; or expert services

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 5 of 13

(03/2019)

☐ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(4) FAR 6.302-4 International Agreement ☐ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(5) FAR 6.302-5 Authorized or required by statute ☐ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(6) FAR 6.302-6 National Security ☐ 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(7) FAR 6.302-7 Public Interest

5. Demonstration of Contractor’s Unique Qualifications (FAR 6.303-2(b)(5)).

Carpi is an Italy based company with sales and engineering services in the United States (Carpi USA) and are unique in that they are a material vendor, installer and provide engineering design services. Carpi has demonstrated experience with installing exposed geomembrane lining systems for dozens of similar dams worldwide and are the industry leader for this type of work and installation requirements, utilizing proprietary methods to provide for a secure, long lasting system for lining the dam face. Carpi’s services include the manufacturing, engineering and installation of their geomembrane and geosynthetic products, and managing construction work on site where the liner is being installed.

Carpi is the only known company with a method to install a geomembrane liner to the steel faced dam. They have developed a proprietary intermediate tensioning profile system which is installed parallel to the slope at regular intervals. The tension profiles include a square-shaped channel that is initially attached to the dam facing with regularly spaced welded tabs. The geomembrane is installed over the channels and then secured with a C-shaped top cap. The top cap pulls the adjoining geomembrane panels taut, practically eliminating wrinkles or sags. A Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC) cover strip is welded over the tensioning profiles to provide a uniform watertight lining. Carpi’s SIBELON C 3900 PVC 120-mil-thick geomembrane is used for the cover strips. The tensioning profile channels also convey potential leakage through the geomembrane down the facing to a geonet drainage layer at the base of the lining and ultimately to drains through the steel faceplate and into the granular embankment materials. Market research indicates there are no other vendors/installers that can provide an intermediate tensioning system, geomembrane and application system that will work on this dam. The intermediate tensioning system allows for tensioning profiles to be welded to the steel face of the dam and secures the geomembrane to the dam utilizing a tensioning system that keeps the geomembrane taut and secure. This system prevents wrinkles and sagging which increases the life of the geomembrane liner.

The Government issued a solicitation for the field trial allowed any contractor to demonstrate their geomembrane material and how they would install it to the face of a steel face dam as long as the material could meet the parameter as follows: resistant to ultra-violet (UV) light exposure, have a long service-life, be puncture resistant from impacts or projections beneath the lining system, tolerate ice loading, have suitable thermal expansion/contraction properties to accommodate temperature differences between the geomembrane liner and the steel faceplate, and be flexible considering the potential for future embankment movements and deformations. It did not define how it would be installed but rather to have them demonstrate how they would install it. No other contractors proposed a geomembrane liner nor a system for installation.

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 6 of 13

(03/2019)

Carpi’s SIBELON CNT 4400 PVC 120-mil-thick geo-composite lining was used in the field trial and was determined to be in the Government’s best interest for full installation on the El Vado Dam. The Government design team has completed 60% of the design for repairs needed for the dam but require input from Carpi to complete the final 40% of the design that is specific to the geomembrane liner and grouting. In order for the design team to complete the design, we are pursuing a design consultation contract so that Carpi can provide input to the Government design team to ensure that the drawings and specifications being developed are consistent with the geomembrane lining system requirements and development of the grouting process.

BOR does not contract out design of modifications to dams and any changes must be addressed by the BOR Engineer’s so this prevents complete design being performed by Carpi.

6. Description of efforts made to maximize competition (FAR 6.303-2(b)(6)).

The Government Acquisition Team has made numerous attempts to solicit input and promote competition for this project including the following: A CAS field trial was conducted to invite potential manufacturers/installers of a geomembrane liner system to demonstrate their products and installation procedures. A Request for Information (RFI) to seek sources for the field trial was posted on June 19, 2018 for multiple potential vendors that could install a test panel piece of geomembrane liner onto the El Vado Dam.

Responses were due by June 27, 2018 and the archive date for this posting was set to December 31, 2018. One response was received from Carpi USA.

A synopsis for the field trial was posted on July 18, 2018 and the solicitation 140R4018Q0080 was posted on July 25, 2018 through FBO and Fedconnect. At the time of posting, BOR Engineers were in the process of assessing six different alternatives, which were discussed above. The purpose of the field trial was to provide additional research for the geomembrane alternative and no indication was provided in the solicitation that a positive result would mean that the geomembrane alternative would be used, the process was merely to assist in providing more information and data to accurately assess and determine the viability of the liner alternative. Notices were also sent directly to the following suppliers of geomembrane liners that had been identified during the CAS: 1. Carpi 2. Layfield 3. Raven Industries 4. Owen’s Corning 5. Firestone GeoGard.

Water Shed Geo contacted the Contracting Officer directly about placing Hydro Turf on the dam face. They were referred to the solicitation for the dam specifications and requirements which specifically identified potential materials to be resistant to ultra-violet (UV) light exposure, have a long service-life, be puncture resistant from impacts or projections beneath the lining system, tolerate ice loading, have suitable thermal expansion/contraction properties to accommodate temperature differences between the geomembrane liner and the steel faceplate, and be flexible considering the potential for future embankment movements and deformations. A quote was not submitted by this company. Engineered Polymer Technologies contacted the Contracting Officer about

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 7 of 13

(03/2019) providing a sample of their product, but they did not have a way to install it on the dam since they have never done dam work. They did provide the samples directly for in house testing.

The solicitation closed on August 23, 2018. The Request for Quote (RFQ) requested that quotes include the following information:

A. Price Schedule B continuation that includes a total overall price.

B. Demonstration Panel Installation Plan, consisting of the following:

1. Manufacturer’s instructions for delivery, storage, and handling of the geonet drainage layer, geotextile cushion, and geomembrane materials.

2. Details of geomembrane installation.

C. System Suitability and Contractor Qualifications section, consisting of the following:

1. System Suitability

a. Discussion of the suitability of the system as part of a potential future project that could include installing a flexible geomembrane lining system over the existing steel faceplate to further reduce the potential for seepage at El Vado Dam.

1) Type of material/liner proposed.

2) Material aging reports and life expectancy for exposed materials for the conditions at the site.

3) Methods of accommodating expansion and contraction of the geomembrane system materials across the full width and height of the dam.

4) Detailed description identifying how the components proposed in the Test Panel Installation Plan would be incorporated into an overall system for the dam face.

2. Contractor Qualifications

a. Provide a preliminary schedule of work to be performed and submittals. Finalized schedule will be submitted after award.

b. Demonstrate that the contractor is an established company that has specialized in geomembrane design and installation for not less than five (5) years.

c. Details of previous project experience shall include:

1) Name of projects

2) Country / location of projects

3) Name and contact details of owner

4) Year installed

5) Type of dam

6) Project altitude

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 8 of 13

(03/2019)

7) Specific details of the geomembrane system utilized

8) Height of dam

9) Slope of upstream face

10) Area of exposed geomembrane

d. The contractor shall provide evidence of the following minimum experience with design, supply, and installation of similar exposed geomembrane systems on at least three (3) water storage embankment dams with the following characteristics:

1) At least 50 feet tall on a slope steeper than 2H:1V.

2) At least 50,000 ft2 upstream face surface area.

3) Experience with the use of mechanical anchorage systems to fasten the geomembrane to a rigid embankment facing such as steel, concrete, asphalt, or roller compacted concrete.

or

The contractor may also list projects involving tunnel lining or other non-dam work which required placement of a geomembrane system to an existing rigid facing for consideration.

D. Past Performance information for three (3) projects that are similar in nature to this type work performed within the last 5 years. At a minimum, the information shall provide for each:

Two quotes were received, one from Carpi USA and one from Lanterra. Upon review of Lanterra’s submission, it was determined that they did not comply with the solicitation requirements because they had only completed the schedule B and no other information was provided. After reaching out to them about possible missing pages and receiving no response by the close of the solicitation, their submission was determined to be non-responsive.

The test panel purchase order 140R4018C0026 was awarded to Carpi USA on September 6, 2018 for $65,000.00. As only one viable response was received from the RFI, which was posted June 19, 2018, and only one responsive contractor submitted for the field trial, the Government Team obtained other, potential, material samples from liner manufacturers. This allowed the Government design team to more accurately test the viability of the liner alternative across a broader range of materials and manufacturers.

Following the in-house testing of materials, including the installation of the Carpi test panel on the dam faceplate, an industry day was held on October 29, 2019 that invited industry experts to attend and provide input on the project. The notice for the industry day was posted through Fedconnect on September 19, 2019 under reference number DOIRFBO190048. The Contract Specialist also directly contacted potential vendors to notify them of the posting.

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 9 of 13

(03/2019)

Seven contractors registered in advance and one additional contractor was in attendance on the day of the event. Of the eight contractors, five requested one-on-ones that were held on the same day of the event after the presentation and site visit to the dam. The presentation provided during the industry day identified constraints, the collected data and an outline for the design and construction plans which included the use of the Capri geomembrane product. It also presented the intended acquisition strategy in which the contract would be sole sourced to Carpi USA.

During the one-on-one sessions, only one contractor communicated their ability to manage the project as the prime contractor, but they also recognized the additional cost of the contract that would be necessary for them to manage the whole contract given that 70% of the work would be for one sub-contractor since they are not a geomembrane liner contractor. They did not offer any alternative methods to perform the work and did express their interest in participating as a sub-contractor for part of the 30% portion of work which falls under their specialty of work.

All other one-on-one sessions were with sub-contractors that showed interest in the work related to the 30% portion of the project. One other company attended the presentation and site visit but cancelled their one-on-one after stating that the level of work was out of their capacity to perform.

As required by FAR 6.302-1 Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services and in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 637(e) and 41 U.S.C.1708, an intent to sole source was posted through FBO on February 21, 2020 and closed at close of business on March 6, 2020. Contractors are encouraged to provide feedback and any objections to the decision of the geomembrane product, any other recommendations related to the project and feedback on the acquisition decision.

One inquiry was received in what appeared to be spam and potential security risk. A HEAT ticket was submitted, and the email was cleared on Friday February 28th. Their request was to provide them with additional information such as “a soft copy of the document”, “names of countries able to participate”, “estimated budget for this purchase”, “any extension of bidding deadline” and “any addendum or pre bid meeting minutes”. After receiving clearance from HEAT, a response was sent to the email notifying them that had not complied with the notice of intent. No further contact has been received.

The Government Acquisition Team has made numerous attempts to solicit and promote competition. The table below summarizes the steps described above:

Efforts Timeline Description Action Date Posted Responses Due Field Trial RFI 06/19/2018 06/27/2018 Field Trial Synopsis 07/18/2018 Field Trial Solicitation 07/25/2018 08/23/2018 Industry Day Held 10/29/2019

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 10 of 13

(03/2019)

Notice of Intent Posting 02/21/2020 03/06/2020

7. Determination of Fair and Reasonable Cost (FAR 6.303-2(b)(7)).

During the test panel performance, a submittal was required to provide potential cost to cover the entire dam with geomembrane. It did not consider repair work, grouting etc.

and was only for the conditions presented in the purchase order for the test panel. The Contracting Officer will use this data, which provides a base of costs, to help determine fair and reasonable costs. Costs from other similar dam projects will be requested from Carpi for the geomembrane liner portion along with certified cost and pricing data that will be utilized to negotiate a firm fixed price award.

For all sub-contractor work being performed, the expectation will be that the work will be competed, and all quotes will be submitted with their proposal where an audit of vendor costs will be performed by the Contracting Officer.

8. Description of Market Research Conducted (FAR 6.303-2(b)(8)).

The CAS team conducted an impact resistance testing program in conjunction with the field trial to evaluate the impact resistance of PVC, High Density Poly Ethylene (HDPE), and Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM) geomembrane samples. These samples met the field trial specification requirements as identified in the solicitation and were purchased or provided at no cost from other potential geomembrane vendors that sell geomembrane liner. None of these vendors were willing to install the geomembrane on the dam.

Two PVC products, two EPDM products and one HDPE product were used in the impact resistance testing program. The testing was performed in the Technical Service Center’s (TSC)’s laboratory and was completed in general conformance with ASTM D5635 which involves a rotating impact hammer that has a wedge-shaped impact device allowing the user to vary the impact energy applied to the geomembrane layering system to see if it is punctured or damaged. The TSC laboratory also fabricated a vertical drop impact apparatus that allows the drop height, weight and impact area to be varied. To evaluate how the material’s impact resistance (brittleness) varies with temperature, the tests were conducted at 73, 32, 0 and minus 40 degrees Fahrenheit. A 2000-gm/m2 geotextile cushion, equivalent to what is being considered in the design, was used in each of the tests.

The impact testing results indicated the PVC and HDPE materials performed the best.

The EPDM materials experienced the most damage and appeared to be mostly related to the EPDM materials being about half the thickness of the PVC and HDPE materials.

PVC performed better over the range of potential exposure temperatures (73, 32 and 0 degrees Fahrenheit), but HDPE performed the best at minus 40 degrees Fahrenheit.

Market research attempted to identify other U.S. based PVC lining manufacturers.

Meetings were held with Engineered Polymer Technologies (EPT) that produce 120-mil-

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 11 of 13

(03/2019) thick PVC lining products. EPT mostly pursues commercial building roofing and tunnel lining projects. EPT did not share accelerated UV testing information that might provide an indication of the service life for a dam lining application. EPT was unable to provide and dam lining projects like what would be required at El Vado Dam but offered a list of installers they have worked with for other large projects.

Findings from the market research, the industry day event, specialist interviews, field trial participation, and laboratory impact testing have indicated a UV-stabilized PVC geomembrane is most suitable for an exposed geomembrane over the existing steel faceplate at El Vado Dam. Carpi is the only contractor able to provide the geomembrane and installation and therefore, a sole source award is supported for this project.

9. Any Other Supporting Facts (FAR 6.303-2(b)(9)).

Results from the test panel installed by Carpi, in-house testing of other materials and research provided by Geosynthetics Institute (GSI) supported the decision that a UV stabilized PVC and HDPE lining materials would be most suitable for the El Vado Dam.

EPDM materials performed poorly and sustained the most damage.

Accelerated UV light exposure testing was conducted and indicated that a half-life exceeding 50 years could be expected for the PVC and HDPE products. Service life for EPDM would likely be 25 to 30 years. The results of the testing indicated that the PVC and EPDM materials are more flexible compared to HDPE and the installation of the HDPE would also be difficult especially in cold ambient temperatures. There was no information that could be obtained to support a HDPE material installation in similar magnitude to what the El Vado Dam would be. This information supported the installation of the exposed PVC installations for dam rehabilitations like the El Vado Dam.

One other company, Engineered Polymer Technologies (EPT), was identified that could provide the UV Stabilized PVC material. During market research, they were contacted and were not interested in participating in the field trial to install a panel on the dam, however, they did offer a list of potential contractors that could install their material.

None of those contractors submitted a quote for the test panel installation or participated in the industry day.

The contract will include a “design consultation” CLIN as well as an optional construction CLIN. Unique characteristics of the project require direct design consultation with the sole source company, Carpi, in order to finalize the design.

Utilizing Carpi’s expertise in the installation design of the liner is in the best interest of the Government. Specific items such as the number of drains, location of the drains, and the method to install will affect the overall design as well as the success of the program.

Carpi is the world leader and the only identifiable source for this material, and it is imperative that they have input into the final designs to ensure the designs will produce the most effective solution. Utilizing Carpi during the design process will mitigate changes that may arise during construction and installation.

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 12 of 13

The Government will also establish one or more construction CLIN’s that will be optional and subject to negotiation upon final design. These CLIN’s will only be awarded once funding has been secured for the construction and a fair and reasonable, fixed price effort has been negotiated for the work.

10. Listing of Interested Sources (FAR 6.303-2(b)(10)).

No additional sources, besides Carpi, expressed in writing any interest in this procurement.

11. Actions Taken to Remove Barriers to Competition (FAR 6.303-2(b)(11)).

There have been no prior awards for this project or similar types of projects. There are no plans for subsequent acquisitions of this same work to be performed in the immediate future.

SIGNATURES

REQUESTING OFFICE REPRESENTATIVE CERTIFICATION:

PREPARED BY:

Name: Lisa Vance

Date:

CONTRACTING OFFICER (CO) (FAR 6.304(a)(1) and WBR 1406.304(a)(1)): (All Values)

Name: Lisa Vance

X

Award Number: 140R4020C0002 Page 13 of 13

CHIEF of the CONTRACTING OFFICE (CCO) (WBR 1406.304(a)(2)): (> $25K)

Name: James L. Durrant

BUREAU COMPETITION ADVOCATE (FAR 6.304(a)(2) and WBR 1406.304(a)(3)):

(>$700K)

Name: Heather R. Hirshman

HEAD OF CONTRACTING ACTIVITY (HCA) (FAR 6.304(a)(3) and WBR 1406.304(a)(4)): (>$13.5M) – Also required for the award of any non-competitive enterprise contract, a contract vehicle where orders or calls can be placed by or on behalf of multiple DOI bureaus, or which will be a mandatory source for DOI.

Name: Ruth Welch

D. Past Performance information for three (3) projects that are similar in nature to this type work performed within the last 5 years. At a minimum, the information shall provide for each: