NRC-HQ-11-R-37-0107_Amendment1.pdf

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001

November 21, 2011

SUBJECT: AMENDMENT NO. 1

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO. NRC-HQ-11-R-37-0107 ENTITLED,

“NEUTRAL SERVICES SUPPORTING THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT’S ALTERNATIVE

DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM”

The purpose of this amendment is to answer potential offeror’s questions. The following are answers to potential offeror’s questions:

Question #1: How are these services currently being performed? Under contract? In-house?

Answer #1: The requirements entitled, “Neutral Services Supporting the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Office of Enforcement’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Program,” are currently being performed by a contractor.

Question #2: If these requirements are currently being performed under a contract?

Who is the Contractor? What is the contract number?

Answer #2: The current contract is with Cornell University and the contract number is NRC-37-06-351. The NRC publicizes all of its contracts through the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). Information on the system and access instructions can be found at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

Question #3: Is there an incumbent and if so, who is it? How long have they had the contract?

Answer #3: The current contract is with Cornell University. Cornell University has provided the NRC the services entitled, “Neutral Services Supporting the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Office of Enforcement’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Program,” since 2004.

Question #4: Refer to section C(II) Contract Objective (p. C-2); regarding the objective “to continue the successful implementation of OE’s ADR program”, has the performance of the current contractor been evaluated in terms of meeting the program’s goals for success, and is a written evaluation available to the public? If so, how can this information be obtained?

Answer #4: The NRC utilizes the Contractor Performance Assessment and Reporting System (CPARS) to evaluate all contractors’ performance. All CPARS information is treated as “For Official Use Only/Source Selection Information” in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 42.1503. The information in CPARS is not releasable as it’s classified as source selection information, since it is constantly used to support ongoing source selections and contains sensitive data concerning a contractor and their performance.

Question #5: Refer to section B.3 Price/Cost Schedule (p. B-1 to B-7); are the price breakdowns charged under the existing contract available to the public? If so, how can this information be obtained?

Answer #5: The price breakdown/unit prices of the current contract are proprietary information and are not publicly releasable.

Question #6: Is there an estimated value range for this requirement?

Answer #6: As stated in the statement of work (See VII in Section C of the RFP), the estimated level of effort is approximately forty (40) cases over a twelve (12) month period; with a estimated breakdown of 20-30 Early ADR cases and 10-15 Post-investigation ADR cases.

Question #7: Refer to section C(VII) Estimated Level of Effort; are there any published statistics for previous program experience on which the program estimates are based?

Are there published results of previous program experience, i.e. settlement rates? If so, how can any of this information be obtained?

Answer #7: Refer to the NRC’s public ADR webpage at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html for additional information.

Question #8: What were the actual number of cases (by Pre and Post mediation) for the last three years?

Answer #8: Refer to the NRC’s public ADR webpage at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html for additional information.

Question #9: Regarding Section H.9, is the place of performance for the “Fixed Price Ongoing Daily Services” at the contractor’s facility?

Answer #9: Yes, the place of performance for the Fixed Price Ongoing Daily Services will be the contractor’s facility.

Question #10: Reference Section C. VI - Meetings and Travel; could you please provide the general geographic regions where the mediation sessions are to be held?

Answer #10: In recent years, most pre-investigation cases have arisen in the NRC’s Region IV. However, there are mediations across the country. Refer to the NRC’s public ADR webpage at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html for additional information.

Question #11: What geographical locations had the majority of cases?

Answer #11: In recent years, most pre-investigation cases have arisen in the NRC’s Region IV. However, there are mediations across the country. Refer to the NRC’s public ADR webpage at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/adr.html for additional information.

Question #12: Refer to section C(III)(ii) Personnel Requirements (p. C-2); from experience with the program to date, what is the expected approximate size and geographic distribution of the national roster of Session Neutrals needed to minimize extensive travel? Is there a published list of the current roster, and if so, how can this information be obtained?

Answer #12: There is no prescribed number of mediators that must be on the roster but the distribution has to be to the level that several mediators from the local geographic region are available. The NRC does not have a published list of mediators.

Question #13: Refer to section C(IV)(B)(i) Selection of Session Neutrals (p. C-5); will parties be able to access the federal shared mediators for this program, or will they be limited to the list approved by NRC under this program?

Answer #13: The mediators must be from the contactor’s roster of mediators.

Question #14: Refer to section C(IV)(B)(i)(c) Selection of Session Neutrals (p. C-5);

would a request for party rankings of mediators on the lists be acceptable to identify the most acceptable mediator? If the parties cannot agree on any proposed mediators on the second list, does the NRC have a preference on what the next step would be (i.e, additional lists, a single administrative appointment subject to conflicts check)?

Answer #14: The NRC does not keep a ranking of mediators. If the parties cannot agree on any proposed mediators, the next step would be for the contractor to appoint a mediator.

Question #15: Does NRC require a management official come to mediation if requested?

Answer #15: No; the NRC does not require an NRC management official or an official associated with the parties involved, to come to mediation. However, each respective party selects the individuals who represent them in a mediation with the authority to bind the party, which in most cases in an official.

Question #16: Refer to section C(IV)(A)(ii)(a) Session Neutral Resource Materials and Orientation (p. C-3); to deliver the annual orientation, would a “webinar” format (i.e. a live session transmitted on the Internet allowing for interactive communication) be acceptable in lieu of an in-person session?

Answer #16: A webinar format is acceptable, as long as the same level of effectiveness is achieved as an in-person session.

Question #17: In the solicitation on page C-4, section h states that contractor support is required for NRC mediator orientation and training, under (i) regarding the designing and assisting in the design…it states that the training may be 1 to 5 days. This wide of a training range can dramatically increase the cost of training. Historically, how many days per year did NRC host mediator orientation and training?

Answer #17: Historically, the qualification criteria has been a 5 day training on the art of mediation which includes 2-3 segments specifically on the NRC ADR program.

Question #18: Refer to section C(IV)(A) (iv)(h) Intake Neutral Basic/Ongoing Services

(p. C-4); since the orientation or training course is expected to last 1 to 5 days, is this expected to be solely an in-person session, or can it be broken into smaller “webinar” format sessions over time?

Answer #18: It is preferable that the orientation or training course not be broken into smaller sessions and that the training be provided in-person. However, a webinar format is acceptable, as long as the same level of effectiveness is achieved as an in-person session.

Question #19: Refer to section C(IV)(A) (iv)(h) Intake Neutral Basic/Ongoing Services

(p. C-4); how are the costs of the orientation and training services described in this section charged (i.e., should they be included in the Section B Price/Cost prices for program tasks, or should these services be priced separately?

Answer #19: All tasks included under Section C(IV)(A) entitled, “Requirements for the Basic Level of Service (Firm Fixed Price)” should be included in the proposed price for “Fixed Price Ongoing Daily Services” (i.e. CLIN 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001).

Question #20: Refer to section C(III)(i) Personnel Requirements (p. C-2); would a crossed-trained team of more than one individual Intake Neutral/Program Manager, comprised of full-time case management professionals providing continuous and backup service to the program, be acceptable to meet the program requirements that there be “the equivalent of one full-time intake neutral/program manager”?

Answer #20: It would be preferable that one individual serve as the Intake Neutral/Program Manager. This would minimize any instances of miscommunication and conversely enhance knowledge management. Moreover, this would ensure that the ADR program is not competing with other tasks that may be assigned to the individuals whose responsibilities include the ADR program among others. However, to the extent the contractor can ensure the same level of high performance, there may be more than one individual fulfilling the “one full-time intake neutral/program manager” requirement.

Question #21: On page C-4 iv regarding establishing and/or maintaining communication and information links such as web pages, list services, and other methods of communication between the parties and the public, is it the intent of NRC that the contract host the web page or just assist with the development of content for web pages that are hosted by NRC?

Answer #21: The intent is that the contractor would assist with the development of content for web pages that are hosted by the NRC.

Question #22: Could you please clarify the second sentence of Section H.1(i) as it relates to the scope of work of this effort?

Answer #22: Clause H.1 2052.209-72 CONTRACTOR ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (JAN 1993) is a NRC Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR) clause. It is the policy of NRC to avoid, eliminate, or neutralize contractor organizational conflicts of interest. The second sentence of section H.1 (i) states, “the contractor shall be ineligible to participate in NRC contracts, subcontracts, or proposals therefore (solicited or unsolicited), which stem directly from the contractor's performance of work under this contract”; the intention of this provision is to avoid a situation where the award of a contract would result in placing the offeror or contractor in a conflicting role in which its judgment may be biased in relation to its work for the NRC, or would result in an unfair competitive advantage for the offeror or contractor.

For more information on the clause see: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/contracting/48cfr-ch20.html#_1_53

Question #23: Regarding Section L.9. Volume II, Item C, Subcontracting Plan – Does the 37% requirement for Small Business include the percentages for the different classes of small business, e.g. 5% for Small Disadvantaged Business, etc.?

Answer #23: Yes, the 37% Small Business subcontracting requirement includes the subcategories (e.g. Small Disadvantaged Businesses, Woman-Owned Small Businesses, Veteran-Owned Small Businesses, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses, and HUBZone-Owned Small Businesses).

Question #24: In regards to Section L.9, is the contractor required to submit hardcopies of the proposal, in addition to emailing?

Answer #24: Proposals may be submitted either by mail OR electronically. Electronic submission is preferred. If your submission is by mail you must submit one original and two (2) copies, no later than 2:00 P.M. EST on Monday, December 05, 2011.

Offers delivered by hand, including delivery by any express mail services or special delivery services which use a courier or other person to deliver the responses in person to the NRC, should be addressed to:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Contracts ATTN: Jennifer A. DeFino- Mail Stop, TWB-01-B10M 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852

If your submission is by email, you must email your proposal to Jennifer.DeFino@nrc.gov no later than 2:00 P.M. EST on Monday, December 05, 2011. Please note that the NRC firewall size limitation is 10MB.