SP060013R0527_AMD_0003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MOD NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

October 30, 2013

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE SP0600 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

SALMAN SHAHID/DLA ENERGY - FESAC salman.shahid@dla.mil

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY ENERGY

8725 JOHN J KINGMAN RD., SUITE 2945 FAX: 703-767-9338

FORT BELVOIR, VA 22060 PHONE: 703-767-9332

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (no., street, city, county, State, and ZIP Code)

CAGE CODE: BIDDER CODE:

X

9a. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

SP0600-13-R-0527

9b. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

September 12, 2013

10a. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10b. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

[ X ] The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers [X] 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 one (1) copy 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 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 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 NUMBERED 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: MUTUAL AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor [ ] is not, [ X ] is required to sign this document and return one (1) copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.

The purpose of amendment 0003 is to do the following:

1. Extend the offer due date from November 5, 2013/3:00p.m.EDT to November 15, 2013/3:00p.m.EST.

2. Revise the following documents:

a) Attachment 1 Performance Work Statement (Added SPECIAL NOTES paragraph j)

b) Attachment 2 52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications (Removed DFARS 252.212-7001)

c) Attachment 3 Pricing Proposal Worksheet for Melville

i. Added Task 7 heading

ii. Removed Task 12 since is not applicable to this solicitation

d) Attachment 3 Pricing Proposal Worksheet for Verona

i. Added Task 7 heading

ii. Added Task 11 heading

iii. Removed Task 12 since is not applicable to this solicitation

3. Provide answers to the following questions starting on page 2.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

YUNYOUNG CHO

15B. NAME OF CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

BY

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA FAR

(48 CFR) 53.

mailto:salman.shahid@dla.mil

SP060013R0527

Amendment 0003

1-Upon review of the performance work statement, we just would like to receive clarification that the items listed are general service requests, and that the intent of the project is for the bidders to review the previous investigations and remediation and develop their own scope of work within the performance work scope outlines to achieve the objective of reaching site closure?

ANSWER: At the proposal level, scope of work (statement of work) is not required by the prospective offerors. We only need prices offered per contract line item. An example would be to give us the pricing to drill a 2” monitoring well 10 feet in depth.

However, at the task order level offeror will provide scope of work (statement of work) per request for proposal.

2-How do we obtain the reports on previous environmental assessments and remediation, including regulatory agency communications, for the sites?

ANSWER:

Reports on previous environmental assessments and remediation, including regulatory agency communications, for the sites are not necessary at this time.

3-Could you please let me know what the submission deadline is for solicitation# SP0600-

13-R-0527?

ANSWER: IAW Amendment 0003 submission deadline has been changed from October 24, 2013/3:00p.m.EDT to November 15, 2013/3:00p.m.EST.

4-Is it possible to substitute the lab methods mentioned in the RFP? Several of the methods are no longer widely used.

ANSWER: For purposes of evaluating proposals there will be no substitutions at this time.

Substitutions will be allowed after contract award if deemed appropriate.

5-Task 12, Monitoring, is missing from CLIN table.

ANSWER: This task is not applicable for this solicitation and has been removed from the PWS.

6-What contract vehicle, separate from this contract, will be used for the demolition of tanks and piping?

ANSWER: There is no contract vehicle identified at this time.

7-Please confirm that the Petroleum Remediation Experience is to be solely from the offeror and not a team member.

ANSWER: The company experience can come from any team member.

8-Would you consider allowing a smaller font, such as 10pt Arial Narrow be used for tables and graphics?

ANSWER: Yes, 10pt Arial Narrow will be accepted for tables and graphics only.

9-Are 11x17 sized pages allowed to be used? If yes, we assume they would count as two (2)

8.5x11 pages.

ANSWER: Yes, 11x17 sized will be accepted for tables and graphics only and it will count as one (1) page.

10-Both the Petroleum Remediation Experience and Project Manager Experience are requested in tabular format and the requirements therein make for a large table. Would you consider allowing a more table-friendly font, such as 10pt Arial Narrow be used for these large tables?

ANSWER: Yes, 10pt Arial Narrow will be accepted for tables and graphics only.

11-By what date are PPQs required to be in DLA’s possession?

ANSWER: November 15, 2013/3:00p.m.EST

12-Section iii. Petroleum Remediation Experience, requires copies of site closure or no further action required letters from regulatory agencies. Please confirm that these letters do not count towards the volume’s 40 page limit. Also, please confirm that these can be provided in an appendix.

ANSWER: Letters do count towards volume’s 40 page limit. And yes, they can be provided in an appendix but appendix is part of the volume’s 40 page limit.

13-The Representations and Certifications in Attachment 2 do not match the

Representations and Certifications in Section K of the solicitation. Which are we to complete and submit with our proposal?

ANSWER: See Revised Attachment 2.

14-Can the proposed project manager be an employee of a subcontractor?

ANSWER: Please see Attachment 1-Performance Work Statement under SPECIAL NOTES, paragraph (j).

“To assure continuity between the facility, the Contractor’s home office, DLA Energy and DLA

Installation Support for Energy, the Contractor shall employ, during the life of this contract to oversee task orders, a Program Manager who can make decisions concerning this contract; who has a complete understanding of the terms and conditions of this contract; and who has experience in the environmental assessment, environmental remediation, and emergency response”.

15- It was stated during the site walks at both Verona and Melville that reverse auction will be utilized to evaluate pricing for this contract. Please specify how the pricing as provided via CLIN pricing will be evaluated in an auction.

ANSWER: The extent of use of reverse auction as a pricing technique will be determined prior to negotiations, if they are held.

16-Please confirm that Task 7 of the CLIN estimate worksheet should be labelled Task 7

DPT Testing.

ANSWER: Please see Revised Attachment 3 for Verona and Melville.

17-The Clin estimate worksheet is missing Task 12 - Monitoring, is this intentional?

CLIN 0002 (Reference Number 0126) has no evaluation estimate associated with it, how will this percentage be evaluated for pricing purposes?

ANSWER: Task is not applicable for this solicitation and has been removed from the PWS.

For CLIN 0002 (Reference Number 0126) offeror is to propose the percentage which is part of the pricing proposal evaluation.

18-What are the regulatory drivers that each site is under requiring at minimum groundwater monitoring? Can we see the recent regulatory correspondence between the

DLA and each of the State agencies? Is EPA involved on either site?

ANSWER: Verona’s driver is the New York Facility Operating License and the latest report is not necessary to provide at this time. Melville does not have groundwater monitoring at this time. EPA is not involved at either site.

19-Can we review the recent environmental reports from assessments and remediation at the sites?

ANSWER: Verona does not have either. Melville environmental reports are not necessary to provide at this time.

20-Can DLA define their goals for each site? Is there a long term plan for the properties now that the sites are no longer used as a petroleum terminal?

ANSWER: The Government’s goal at Verona is spill prevention and petroleum release detection by groundwater monitoring. The goal at Melville is to identify and remove soil contamination that exceeds industrial action levels.

21-Regarding past performance, how will the DLA view sites that are non-government sites vs government experience?

ANSWER: Please see Addendum 52-212-1, Volume II, Section II-Past Performance, Paragraph

(b)

…...“The offeror shall demonstrate evidence of experience in performing Environmental

Response Services for DoD bulk storage terminals or fuel storage terminals of similar size and complexity”.

22-Task 7 and 12 are missing from the cost sheet, will this be revised

ANSWER: Task 7 is updated. Task 12 is not applicable for this solicitation and has been removed from the PWS

23-Regarding the cost tables, should we include all anticipated subcontractor costs for each given line item? We realize that Task 15 defines that waste disposal should not be included.

For example, line item 0007 soil borings up to 10’, should we include driller costs. Also, should we include surveyor costs or is hand held GPS accuracy okay?

ANSWER: Include all subcontractor and in-house labor costs. Separate out related Tasks for example waste disposal, surveyor, etc.

24-Please clarify costing associated with well development. Are we to include taking contaminated water to treatment systems at both sites, or are we to propose other options for water/free product disposal. We understand that non-contaminated water can be applied to the ground surface. Also please define the preferred procedure for well development.

ANSWER: Your offer should include your assumptions for performing the task and should include the methods, procedures, and protocols for well development. In the case of handling the water during well development you can assume that contaminated water would be handled and priced separately.

25-Optional sampling methods could reduce time and fees. At the site walk DLA representative stated that groundwater samples should be collected using removal of 3 well volumes with a bailer. Can other methods’ that could reduce costs be proposed?

ANSWER: Yes, those methods must meet regulatory requirements.

26-Please provide well construction logs for pricing of well sampling.

ANSWER: That information is not needed. Assumptions should be made.

27-Are there any client-specific subsurface clearance protocols that need to be followed during drilling activities (hand-clearing, air-knife/vactor)?

ANSWER: There are no client specific protocols and offerer should provide their methods, procedures, protocols, and assumptions.

28-Under Task 5, costs to install monitoring wells - should we include the cost of drilling of a soil boring, or is this Task intended to include only the labor and materials to install the monitoring well following completion of a soil boring. Task 5 also includes well abandonment. What method of well abandonment will be required? The RIDEM allows for a variety of options (over-drilling, pulling, split/grout). Please clarity the method that will be required.

ANSWER: Each are separate tasks: soil boring, monitoring well, and well abandonment.

Assume well abandonment is pulling casing and grouting.

29-Does the laboratory need to be DOD certified and State of Rhode Island certified? If

DOD certification is required, is State of Rhode Island certification still required?

ANSWER: DoD certification is not required but use of State certified labs is required.

30-Many of the analytical methods specified in Task 9 are no longer valid analytical methods. Should we provide pricing for the new methods? Alternative methods can be proposed however, the proposed analytical methods would be dependent on the list of target compounds. Can you clarify the compound lists that will need to be analyzed so the appropriate alternative method can be specified?

ANSWER: Only provide prices for each test method. Alternative test methods will be considered after contract award and as appropriate.

31-Provide specification for the product recovery aboveground storage tank (AST) described in Task 10.

ANSWER: Offeror should provide a tank that meets common standards for the typical task and any relevant assumptions.

32-Confirm purged groundwater generated during pump testing (Task 11) can be discharged directly to the ground surface.

ANSWER: For the proposal, yes that can be assumed.

33-Can you provide the existing self-monitoring programs described in Task 12.

ANSWER: This task is not applicable for this solicitation and has been removed from the PWS

34-Please provide definitions for labor categories specified in Task 14, including years of experience and degree/professional registration requirements.

ANSWER: Professional labor categories are Engineer, Hydrogeologist, Geologist, and

Toxicologist.

35-Regarding CLINs and reference number tasks that may include generation of remediation or assessment derived waste, the bid document indicated that management, characterization and disposal of waste is to be handled under Task 15 (Other Direct Costs

For Reimbursable Services, Materials, or Supplies, and that costs for waste management, characterization and disposal is not included any of the defined tasks in the bid document.

Can you confirm this is the case?

ANSWER: Yes, 36-Regarding CLINs and reference number tasks that require boring or other per effort services (Reference numbers: 007-0010; 0012-0021; 0023-0026): In order to offer the best value to the government and provide “apples to apples” pricing, AMO would like to know how many of these activities might be ongoing in the same callout. For example, the unit prices for a call out to bore 10 wells will be less (bulk discounts) than the unit prices for the call out to drill one well. Should the basis for our pricing be one well or activity per callout? Should we show volume breakpoints such as Price per foot: 1-3 activates per call out; 3-7 activities per callout; 7 plus activities per callout? We believe that specifying these breakpoints will eliminate many assumptions in the submittals while securing the best pricing for the Government.

ANSWER: Assume one boring and one monitoring well.

37-Please confirm that all overhead and profit (OH&P) are captured under defined Tasks

1 through 14, and that Task 15 includes mark-up on direct costs not included in defined

Tasks 1 through 14.

ANSWER: Overhead and Profit should be included in offeror’s price for Tasks 1 through 14.

Task 15 is the only task for which the contractor will be entitled to mark-ups for overhead and profit to be added to the direct cost of the work. Offerors are required to provide the total percentage of mark- up to be added to their direct cost for work ordered under CLIN 0002 for

Task 15.

38-During the bid walk For the Verona, NY site it was relayed to the bidders that the scope for this site included semi-annual groundwater sampling and annual cleanout of the oil water separator. Please confirm.

ANSWER: Yes, that is correct.

39-Can you clarify for the Volume II Business Management Proposal, under Past

Performance, that other than resumes, you will not require any other information in the response, the Attachment 5 questionnaires are to be sent directly from our requested references to you by e-mail?

ANSWER: Please see Addendum 52-212-1, Volume II, Section II-Past Performance, Paragraph

(b) of the solicitation for all the minimum requirements that offeror should provide. Yes, Attachment 5 questionnaires are to be sent directly from your references to DLA Energy.

40-Does the DLA require the Project Manager to be employed by the Prime Contractor, or can that individual support the contract activities as a subcontractor?

ANSWER: Please see Attachment 1-Performance Work Statement under SPECIAL NOTES, paragraph (j).

41-The pricing schedule appears to omit price line items associated with PWS Task 12:

Monitoring. Can you confirm if this is correct?

ANSWER: Please see Revised Attachment 3 for Verona and Melville.

42-Should costs for utility clearance be included in our pricing for Task 2 (soil/gas survey), Task 4 (soil boring installation) and Task 5 (well installation), or should we assume that all utility clearance requirements will be covered in Task 3: Geophysical

Survey (CLIN 0001, 0006)?

ANSWER: Yes, assume utility clearance in Task 3.

43-Should we assume that only one soil boring (Task 4) and one well (Task 5) would be required to be installed per event (“unit”)? Or can we assume that our unit cost is for 5 borings, 5 wells, etc. (5 borings/unit)?

ANSWER: Assume one boring/unit and one well/unit.

44-Should the unit price for Task 2: Soil/Gas Survey include submittal for laboratory analysis and date interpretation?

ANSWER: Include only lab analysis and data report. No data interpretation.

45-Task 6: Well Development includes a statement that the work shall include obtaining a water sample from the well after development. Should we assume this sample is collected immediately (same day) as the well development activities are completed, or is the sample collection to be completed on another date? How does this sample collection differ from the requirements stated in Task 12: Monitoring?

ANSWER: Yes, sampling does differ for each task. Provide your methods, procedures, protocols for obtaining water samples.

Answer to the second question is Task 12 is not applicable for this solicitation and has been removed from the PWS.

46-Task 9 - Can we use alternate analytical test methods from the ones listed on the pricing sheet? What certifications are required for the laboratory?

ANSWER: For the proposal, alternative methods are not appropriate. State certified lab should be used.

47-Task 14, 0117 - Furnish and fill with soil roll off bin, price per bin. Should this price include transportation and disposal of non-hazardous soil?

ANSWER: Furnish and fill only. No transportation and disposal.

48-Is the one (1) page Scenario Response (Section 1.d.ii) included in the page count?

ANSWER: Yes, it is included in the page count.

49-Are the copies of site closure or no further action required letters from regulatory agencies included in the page count?

ANSWER: Yes

50-May we use single-sided 11x17 sized paper for the tabular presentation of our

Petroleum Remediation Experience (Section 1.d.iii) and the tabular presentation of our

Project Manager’s Experience (Section 1.d.iv)? If so, does the 11x17 paper count as one page or two pages?

ANSWER: Yes, 11x17 sized will be accepted for tables and graphics only and it will count as one (1) pages.

51-We assume the acronym list and list of figures and tables are not in the page count.

ANSWER: They are part of the page count.

52-Is the experience listing for the prime only or may the offeror also present the experience of the teaming partner/sub?

ANSWER: Company experience should include both prime and teaming partner.

53-Must all the projects be completed or may the offeror present ongoing projects?

ANSWER: Both can be presented.

54-Is there a timeframe for these projects, e.g., with in the last ten years? Last five years?

ANSWER: Last ten years.

55-Page 49 of 55, Volume I, Technical Management Proposal, Section II – Technical

Management, Project Manager Experience – This section requires the offeror to identify the Project Manager for each facility, though the same person may be identified as the

Project Manager for both facilities. Is the Project Manager at both facilities required to be an employee of the prime?

ANSWER: Please see Attachment 1-Performance Work Statement under SPECIAL NOTES, paragraph (j).

56-Is it acceptable to submit ongoing projects for Past Performance?

ANSWER: Yes.

57-The language in the third paragraph under this section appears to indicate that the projects may be from the prime or a teaming partner/subcontractor. Please confirm that this interpretation is correct.

ANSWER: Yes.

58-I am assuming that the Prime Offeror, could include past performance information for a proposed teaming partner/subcontractor in its proposal and the teaming partner’s past performance would be considered during the evaluation process. If our proposed subcontractor for this effort was the Prime on the contract that is submitted for past performance, I would assume we would provide Past Performance information items b and c and a PPQ.

ANSWER: Yes, IAW Addendum 52-212-1, Volume II, Section II-Past Performance section of the solicitation.