14-R-0503_Amd_0003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

December 31, 2013

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

Central East Environmental

6. ISSUED BY CODE

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

8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN RD., ROOM 2945

FT. BELVOIR, VA 22060-6222

BUYER/SYMBOL – Alex Cano/DLA Energy-FESAC

PHONE – (703) 767-9337 FAX – (703) 767-9338

Email – Alexandro.Cano@dla.mil

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

9a. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

SP0600-14-R-0503

9b. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

November 13, 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 [ ] is extended, [X ] 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 1 copies 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 your 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: (Specify authority)

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF: (Specify authority)

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor [ ] Is not, [ ] is required to sign this document and return one ____ copy to the issuing office.

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

A. The purpose of Amendment 0003 is to:

1. Provide answers to questions submitted by potential offerors. Questions and answers begin on page 2.

2. Corrections/Revisions are made to the solicitation as indicated in the answers to questions #15, #16, #38, and #47.

3. The proposal submission due date is Wednesday, January 8, 2014, 3:00 p.m. EST.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

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

16A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

YUNYOUNG CHO

15B. NAME OF CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

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

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C.DATE SIGNED

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Previous edition unusable Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Amendment 0001

1. QUESTION: Can you provide the names of the incumbents at each location?

ANSWER: All four locations are under Shaw Environmental now known as CB&I.

2. QUESTION: Can the Table of CLIN reference numbers required for Scenario Response be included on a second page?

ANSWER: Yes.

3. QUESTION: Can Tables be 11x17? Would each 11x17 sheet this still count as only 1 page?

ANSWER: Yes.

4. Can previous questionnaires submitted by our Clients for Hunter Army Airfield proposal be used by the DLA for this submittal also, or do new Questionnaires need to be submitted?

ANSWER: Please submit new questionnaires for this solicitation.

5. QUESTION: Although each location required a separate submittal, please confirm that the questionnaire’s only need to be submitted once (e.g. they are valid for all submittals)?

ANSWER: Yes, please submit to Alexandro.Cano@dla.mil once.

6. QUESTION: Please confirm that attachment 5 does not need to be completed if the Prime is a small business.

ANSWER: Attachment 5 does not need to be completed by a small business.

7. QUESTION: The quantities for work tasks at each location do not appear to be consistent. For instance the Task 9 Analytical testing for Tampa is significantly greater than the other locations, and yet the level of potential work discussed at the MacDill site visit does not seem to reflect the quantities identified.

ANSWER: See answer for Question number 8 below.

8. QUESTION: Please confirm the quantities for all tasks at all locations are correct since rates proposed are, in part, a reflection of the anticipated volume?

ANSWER: The estimated quantities were developed relative to what was anticipated at the time of preparation of the solicitation package months prior to the site visit. There are many unknowns for the future five-year period for each of the locations that can affect the quantities. The quantities can change depending on what events occur; therefore, these numbers are not set in stone nor guaranteed. Offers should be made based upon the quantities provided.

9. QUESTION: If the actual quantities for the contract are significantly less or more (say 25% or more difference), is there the potential to negotiate a revised rate to reflect this significant change?

ANSWER: No, these are unit level prices for the length of the contracts. The only CLINs that may be subject to adjustments are those under the labor categories covered under the wage determinations as provided via Attachment 4.

10. QUESTION: Regarding the Pricing clause below, since we have not had a DCAA audit, but are in process of upgrading our system and protocols to meet the government accounting standards, can we self-certify that we will have in place a DCAA acceptable system, to be certified by DCAA or a CPA, prior to award?

“Section V – PRICE mailto:Alexandro.Cano@dla.mil

In addition to the PRICE PROPOSAL WORKSHEETS offerors shall submit an Accounting System Certification, which is a statement certifying that the offeror has an established accounting system with internal Controls adequate to safeguard assets, to insure that funds are accounted for by cost categories, to check the accuracy and reliability of the accounting data, to promote operating efficiency, and to permit compliance with Government requirements and accounting.

The statement shall be executed by a certified public accountant (CPA), licensed public accountant, a bona-fide accounting or audit organization such as Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or an entity of equivalent status acceptable to the Government. If the offeror cannot prove it possesses such a system, the offer will not be eligible for an award.”

ANSWER: If the offeror does not have Accounting System Certification IAW clause 52.212-1 by the submission due date a statement may be submitted to that effect (offeror does not yet have the certification), and that the offeror understands that the statement certifying the offeror’s accounting system IAW ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1: INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS must be submitted prior to the contract award.

11. QUESTION: For Jacksonville: How is purge water and well development water from current site projects currently treated or disposed?

ANSWER: This is not necessary information needed for evaluation of the offers. Task orders are negotiated and awarded separately for this type of scenario after award of the contract.

12. QUESTION: For Charleston: During the site walk, it was referenced that the effluent from the DPE remediation system located near Charleston AFB was possibly discharged to the AFB. Can you confirm this and provide information on how this relationship works?

ANSWER: This is not necessary information needed for evaluation of the offers. Task orders are negotiated and awarded separately for this type of scenario after award of the contract.

13. QUESTION: For Charleston: It was mentioned that the sampling of wells on the AFB property required coordinating the shutting down of runways in order to perform the sampling. Can you please inform us how this impacts sampling coordination. Is there site specific training that our field personnel will need to perform the sampling near the runways?

ANSWER: This is not necessary information needed for evaluation of the offers. Task orders are negotiated and awarded separately for this type of scenario after award of the contract. Any site specific requirements will be added and negotiated appropriately.

14. QUESTION: Historically, DLA’s solicitations for environmental services at multiple, even distant, installations have requested a SINGLE technical and cost proposal (with copies), the content of which covering all locations listed in the RFP. This RFP states “separate proposals must be submitted for each location” even though the content of both volumes –for all sites– will be minimally different, if at all. Please consider removing this requirement and thereby potentially simplifying DLA’s review process.

ANSWER: The combining of sites in a single technical proposal is acceptable provided site specific information is annotated. Pricing proposals must be provided separately for each location unless otherwise specified in the offer.

15. QUESTION: In Section L, iv. Project Manager Experience, the RFP states, “The proposal must provide a Project Manager for each solicited facility; however, it is acceptable to provide the same Project Manager for all two facilities.” Please confirm that this sentence should instead read, “…same Project Manager for all facilities.”

ANSWER: Addendum to 52.212-1 Instructions to offerors – Commericial Items (FEB 2012) paragraph iv.

Project Manager, first sentence, under Volume I Technical Management Proposal, is revised to state: “The proposal must provide a Project Manager for each solicited facility; however, it is acceptable to provide the same Project Manager for all facilities.”

16. QUESTION: In Section L, the RFP states in subsection i. Technical Management of Environmental Response Services, “The proposal must clearly provide an understanding of services to be provided for Tasks one (1) through 18 in the Performance Work Statement” however the PWS lists only 16 tasks. Please confirm that the number “18” listed is a typographical error and should be “16.”

ANSWER: Addendum to 52.212-1 Instructions to offerors – Commercial Items (FEB 2012) paragraph i.

Technical Management of Environmental Response Services, first sentence, under Volume I Technical Management Proposal, is revised to correct the number of tasks referenced from 18 to 16.

17. QUESTION: Are 11x17 sized pages allowed to be used? If yes, please confirm their page count value.

ANSWER: The 11X17 sixed page counts as one page.

18. QUESTION: 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: 10pt Arial Narrow is acceptable.

19. QUESTION: Would you consider allowing a smaller font, such as 10pt Arial Narrow be used for tables and graphics?

ANSWER: 10pt Arial Narrow is acceptable.

20. QUESTION: Under CLIN 0115 (Furnish and fill with soil roll-off bin, price per bin):

a. What size roll-off bin is to be provided?

ANSWER: Assume a standard size roll-off for handling excavated soil in bulk and state size in the assumption.

b. Does the scope of this CLIN include only furnish and fill roll-off bin (i.e. no transportation, storage, disposal)?

ANSWER: Only furnish.

c. Does the scope of this CLIN intend for the roll-off to be rented on a temporary basis, and if so, what type of rate is to be provided (per day, per week, per month) and what is the assumed duration of the rental?

ANSWER: Assume per month rental.

21. QUESTION: Charleston site specific— Can the work be performed under a state licensed professional engineer with extensive verifiable experience versus a state licensed geologist?

ANSWER: The license geologist is required where called for in the applicable tasks outlined in the PWS.

22. QUESTION: Please clarify that unit prices are to be inclusive of all levels of effort to achieve task (labor, subcontractors, materials, equipment, etc.).

ANSWER: The unit prices for the tasks outlined in the PWS are to be inclusive as noted in the question.

23. QUESTION: Task 7: Direct Push Testing: one unit of direct push testing consists of five (5) individual probes. Assume a maximum probe depth of fifty (50) feet. Please clarify that the basis for this task is 250 feet.

ANSWER: Assumption is correct.

24. QUESTION: Task 11: Pump Test: Is there an expected extraction rate (gpm) range to achieve?

ANSWER: Offeror needs to state the assumptions

25. QUESTION: In light of business closures and multiple organizational shut downs over the upcoming holiday period, will there be a grace period extended beyond the proposal due date of January 8, 2014 at 3:00 pm EST for the submission of the Past Performance Questionnaires for references to respond directly to the Government?

ANSWER: There will not be an extension; however, if past performance questionnaires are received from references after the proposal submission date, the Contracting Officer has the discretion to determine acceptability at that time and may consider submissions for evaluation.

26. QUESTION: Per the initial solicitation, page 2 of 46, paragraph D, electronic pricing spreadsheets are to be submitted. Please clarify how DLA prefers the electronic pricing spreadsheets to be submitted; i.e., CD, email, etc.

ANSWER: Email submissions of the pricing spreadsheets are preferred.

27. QUESTION: Please provide the following information regarding the incumbent for the current contract of each location (DFSP Charleston, SC; DFSP Jacksonville, FL; DFSP Tampa, FL; and DFSP Norfolk, VA):

Name, CAGE Code, Contract Number, Contract Value to date, and a copy of the incumbent’s proposal/submittal under the current contract or an explanation of the proper procedures to obtain a copy of such submittals.

ANSWER: The incumbent contractor for all four locations is Shaw Environmental (now known as CB&I Federal Services LLC). The contract numbers and current values to date are as follows: Charleston, SP0600-09- D-5917, $10,430,503.30; Jacksonville, SP0600-09-D-5915, $1,730,174.57; Tampa, SP0600-09-D-5914, $2,923,075.41; and Norfolk, SP0600-09-D-5911, $1,094,553.31. All other information requests can be made through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

28. QUESTION: The RFP states that the Table of Contents, Exceptions Page, and Resumes do not count towards page count. Please confirm whether NFA Letters, Proposal Covers, Cover Letter, Title Page, List of Exhibits and Acronym List also will not count towards the page count limit requirement.

ANSWER: The NFA Letters, Proposal Covers, Cover Letter, Title Page, List of Exhibits and Acronym List also will not count towards the page count limit requirement.

29. QUESTION: As it will make for better presentation of tabular data, Is it acceptable to use 10-point Arial Narrow in Tables and Graphics?

ANSWER: Yes, it is acceptable to use 10-point Arial Narrow in Tables and Graphics.

30. QUESTION: Is it acceptable to use 11 x 17-inch paper for presentation of tabular information? The project experience table and perhaps the Project Manager table in particular look like they will require such in order to present the information in the most usable manner. If the paper size is acceptable, please confirm how many pages are counted on 11 x 17 size paper.

ANSWER: Yes, it is acceptable to use 11 x 17-inch paper and each will count as one page.

31. QUESTION: Page 40, Section L.1. Does the one page maximum for the Scenario Response include the table for CLIN Level of Effort requirement or is that in addition to?

ANSWER: The one page maximum is for the narrative portion of the scenario response. The table and CLIN Level of Effort can be on a separate page.

32. QUESTION: Page 41, Section IV Past Performance. We assume that the definition of “contract” can be either a Master Contract under which individual task orders are performed OR an individual task order. Please confirm.

ANSWER: Individual task orders are also considered a contract.

33. QUESTION: Please confirm that the past performance of a subcontractor who is a member of the Team can be included and that evaluation will be for that of the Team vs. individual companies.

ANSWER: Recent and relevant past performance for team members will be appropriately considered.

34. QUESTION: Page 40, Section I, ii. says “…understanding of services to be provided for Tasks one (1) through 18 in the Performance Work Statement.” We note there are 16 tasks in the PWS and the Pricing Worksheets. Please clarify.

ANSWER: See Answer to Question 16.

35. QUESTION: What is the time frame of performance that the 10 projects to be presented in the Petroleum Remediation Table must meet?

ANSWER: Projects within the most recent 10 years.

36. QUESTION: Does the Analytical Lab used need to be a DoD certified Lab? Are state certifications required?

ANSWER: State certified labs must be used.

37. QUESTION: Superior analytical technology has replaced methods outlined in the RFP. May we propose alternate laboratory methods in our technical approach?

ANSWER: Please provide prices for the tests called for in the solicitation. Alternate laboratory methods can be mentioned in the offer and will be considered for use as applicable after contracts are awarded.

38. QUESTION: The Pricing worksheets for Norfolk, Jacksonville, and Charleston do not include CLIN 12, but it is in the PWS. Please clarify the government’s intent concerning this task/CLIN for each location and revise RFP documents accordingly. If CLIN 12 is to be addressed for these locations, what is the sampling frequency, number of wells, depth of wells and analyses required?

ANSWER: This task is not applicable for this solicitation. The groundwater monitoring can vary due to changing site conditions each location and will be ordered under separate task orders after the contracts are awarded. The PWS is revised to remove the monitoring language under Task 12. Task 12 is now reserved.

39. QUESTION: At the Norfolk Site Visit only work at Craney Island was discussed. The PWS mentions not only the Craney Island site, but also Sewells Point and Yorktown. Please clarify if the Sewells Point and Yorktown sites are included in the scope of work of this contract. If so, please provide further information on the two additional sites in terms of description/scope of work.

ANSWER: The other two sites are under this contract but do not have any known contamination that needs to be addressed. If contamination is discovered or a fuel release occurs, the contract is DLA’s vehicle to address environmental assessment and cleanup responsibilities.

40. QUESTION: We are assuming that the lab reports will require a standard EDD package with Level III or IV deliverables. Is this assumption correct?

ANSWER: Correct.

41. QUESTION: Is there a monitoring program (Task 12) for Tampa DFPS? If yes, what is the sampling frequency, number of wells, depth of wells and analyses required? If no, please revise the costing sheet for Tampa to delete Task 12.

ANSWER: See answer to Question #38.

42. QUESTION: Regarding PPQs, we assume the PPQ returned by each client is sufficient whether bidding on one, two, three, or four of the locations covered by the solicitation despite the requirement of separate proposal submittal for each of the locations. Please confirm.

ANSWER: Yes, that is correct.

43. QUESTION: Please delineate the license type needed for wastewater treatment plant operator at the Charleston location.

ANSWER: Please assume the licensing requirements for that state of South Carolina applies here.

44. QUESTION: Can Dual Tube or Macro Core sampling be utilized in place of Split Spoon sampling?

ANSWER: Please submit your methods, protocols, procedures, and assumptions made when addressing this task.

45. QUESTION: Due to the Christmas and New Year holidays, which impacts getting pricing from subcontractors and PPQ responses from clients, and given the uncertainties and complexities of the questions that have been submitted, would DLA Energy consider an extension of two weeks for the due date of the proposal submittal?

ANSWER: The proposal submittal date remains Wednesday, January 8, 2014, 3:00pm E.S.T. See answer to question #25 in regards to the past performance questionnaire.

46. QUESTION: Can we submit PPQs for more than one location if we list all locations on the PPQ, so the client only needs to fill it out once and rather than submit it 4 times?

ANSWER: Yes, that is correct.

47. QUESTION: Page 2 of 46 of the RFP says that Offerors may “submit proposals for one, two, three or all locations”, implying 4 locations. Page 7 of 46, Section B states “DLA Energy shall award three, five-year long contracts”, and lists sites at “DLA Energy Charleston, SC, DFSP Jacksonville, FL and DFSP Norfolk, VA”.

Please confirm that the site at Tampa, FL is also included in this RFP? Also, that there are separate submittals required for the two FL locations, or one proposal that covers both FL locations.

ANSWER: There are four locations to include DFSP Tampa. Technical proposal may be consolidated for one or more locations provided site specific information is annotated. Pricing proposals must be provided separately for each location unless otherwise specified in the offer.

Contract Provision B-0001 B35 SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED AND PRICES (ENVIRONMENTAL)(DLA ENERGY MAR 2009), first paragraph is hereby revised to include DFSP Tampa, FL and to revise the number of five-year long-term contracts from three to four.

48. QUESTION: On page 42 of the solicitation, e. Section V – PRICE, the government requires an Accounting System Certification that includes statements for “internal controls adequate to safeguard assets” and “to promote operating efficiency”. A typical audit from DCAA does not examine these portions of the accounting system. The standard certification letter received by contractors from DCAA determines that the company’s accounting system is adequate for accumulating costs under government contracts. The scope of the audit includes:

a. Review of internal controls for accumulating costs,

b. Determination that internal controls are adequate,

c. Examination of evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the data,

d. Assessment of the accounting principles used,

e. Overall data and records presentation, and

f. Determination of need for technical specialist assistance.

Based on the scope described above; would a DCAA audit result concluding that the contractor’s accounting system is adequate for accumulating and billing costs for government contracts satisfy the accounting system certification requirement referenced above? If not, would the government consider changing this requirement in

e. Section V to be more in alignment with the typical DCAA audit performed to determine that the “accounting systems is adequate for accumulating costs under government contracts”?

If the government answers no to both of the above requests, if a firm does not yet have Accounting System Certification (in accordance with Addendum to 52.212-1: Instructions to Offers-Commercial Item, 2. Volume II.d Section III- Price, page 43 of 48) at the time of proposal submittal, but can complete such audit prior to contract award, will that firm be disqualified? If DLA accepts pre-award certification of the firm’s accounting system, by what deadline should this certification be submitted to remain eligible for award?

ANSWER: If the offeror does not have Accounting System Certification IAW clause 52.212-1 by the submission due date a statement may be submitted to that effect (offeror does not yet have the certification), and that the offeror understands that the statement certifying the offeror’s accounting system IAW ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1: INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS must be submitted prior to the contract award.

49. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Scope, Item c, Remediation, please provide an example of what DLA Energy means by the statement that the “contractor shall conduct concurrent engineering rather than sequential engineering.”

ANSWER: Environmental remediation should occur concurrent with the environmental assessment phase. For example free product removal must be occurring simultaneously with the assessment phase.

50. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 2, Soil/Gas Survey: What analyses will be required during performance of a soil gas survey? Is a standard laboratory Electronic Data File (EDF) suitable for upload to Geotracker satisfactory?

ANSWER: Yes.

51. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 2, Soil/Gas Survey: The RFP states that information from the soil gas survey will be used to locate new monitoring wells and evaluate potential vapor intrusion. To evaluate vapor intrusion, it would be helpful to know whether a Commercial or Residential scenario is being selected in order to determine detection limits for the mobile laboratory. Can you provide that information?

ANSWER: Either scenario is acceptable. The offeror should specify in their assumptions when addressing this task.

52. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 2, Soil/Gas Survey states “Assume probe depths of 4 feet and 14 feet.”

Please clarify that the 4 feet depth is one point and the 14 feet depth is the second point and that both points are to be installed in the same borehole at 5 separate onsite locations.

ANSWER: Please submit your methods, protocols, procedures, and assumptions made when addressing this task.

53. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 2, Soil/Gas Survey: Is hand-augering required for utility clearance purposes at soil gas probe locations? If so and if the required hand-auger depth is 5 feet, then the 4-foot probe will have to be installed and a waiting period of 2 days will be required prior to purging and sampling of the probe.

ANSWER: Please address the task stating your assumptions. The responses to the task do not need to be that specific, just describe the techniques for performing the task.

54. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 3, Geophysical Survey: The Bid Specifications states that ground penetrating radar (GPR) is to be used to locate underground storage tanks, pipelines, and utilities. It is recommended that a variety of geophysical multiple instruments are utilized to complete the geophysical survey.

This is because each instrument senses different material properties of the ground and buried objects. Thus, if GPR is the only geophysical instrument utilized during the surveys, this will allow for a greater possibility of missing buried objects that may go undetected by GPR, but otherwise be detectable by one of the other instruments. Please advise.

ANSWER: Please address the task stating your assumptions. The responses to the task do not need to be that specific, just describe the techniques for performing the task.

55. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 3, Geophysical Survey: The Bid Specifications states that one unit rate of geophysical surveying equal 10,000 linear feet. Could this include both on-site areas and off-site pipelines?

ANSWER: Yes

56. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 4, Soil Boring, states that “non-contaminated soil shall be spread in the vicinity of the work.” Is it the expectation of DLA Energy that non-contaminated soil be spread in the vicinity of the work before mobilizing to the next location or can the soil be stockpiled near the drilling location and spread at the end of the drilling project using a bobcat or skip loader?

ANSWER: Either assumption could be made but stockpiling before spreading is the most likely scenario.

57. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 4, Soil Boring, states “samples shall be screened by head space analysis using an Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA).” Is any reading greater than zero on the OVA from soil cuttings considered contaminated?

ANSWER: The offeror needs to provide the assumption based upon knowledge of performing this work and experience.

58. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 6, Well Development states “non-contaminated water shall be disposed of on site in the vicinity of the work.” Please verify that this means that water generated during well development shall be drummed and remain at the well site pending laboratory analysis and that non-contaminated means a laboratory reported final result of non-detected concentrations (below the detection limit for each compound)?

ANSWER: The assumption stated in the PWS to dispose well development water on site is to eliminate these questions for pricing purposes. Whether the water needs to be drummed will be addressed on a case by case basis after contract award and when it is required.

59. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 7, Direct Push Testing: Is there a particular size or type of direct push sampler to be used? Can samples be retained in acetate liners?

ANSWER: Offeror needs to state their methods protocols and procedures for the DPT and the retainers for the liners. There is no particular DPT sampler size that DLA is looking for.

60. QUESTION: For Attachment 1, Task 7, Direct Push Testing, will DLA Energy provide the most recent set of drawings in AutoCAD format for each site?

ANSWER: DLA may or may not be able to provide these drawings.

61. QUESTION: Does Attachment 1, Task 9, Analytical Testing, include any type of data validation procedure required for the analytical results other than those performed by the contracted laboratory?

ANSWER: The offer needs to provide there protocols, methods and procedures and state assumptions when responding to this task.

62. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 9, Analytical Testing, requests that “the standard turnaround time (business days) to obtain results and surcharges for 72 hour and 24 hour expedited turnaround” be provided.

Attachment 3, Task 9, Analytical Testing, does not contain a line item for the surcharge amounts. Where should the surcharges for 72 hour and 24 hour expedited turnaround of analytical results be submitted?

ANSWER: DLA is looking for the standard turnaround price for analysis. The 72 and 24 hour turnaround will be negotiated if needed on a per task order basis and only in rare emergency circumstances.

63. QUESTION: For Attachment 1, Task 9, Analytical Testing, what are the requirements for the laboratory deliverables?

ANSWER: Standard lab testing data. No analysis of the data.

64. QUESTION: For Attachment 1, Task 9, Analytical Testing, does the contracted laboratory need to be DOD Certified?

ANSWER: No, but must be state certified.

65. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 9 specifies that analytical testing for task 4, 5, and 7 are under this task. It does not mention analytical testing for Task 12, Monitoring. Is it DLA’s intent to include all analytical testing in Task 9, or should we include any analytical testing under task 12 in the CLINs for that task?

ANSWER: Task 12 is not applicable for these contracts.

66. QUESTION: Attachment 1, Task 10, Recovery Wells:

a. Is NAPL from the sites classified as a hazardous waste for disposal?

b. Can the 150 gallon NAPL storage tank and conveyance piping be installed above ground? If so, does the tank and piping have to be explosion proof?

c. Do either above or below ground tank installation require local building and fire department permitting and inspection?

ANSWER: Offeror needs only to respond to the specifics listed in the PWS for this task and state assumptions made when responding to this task.

67. QUESTION: Does the Contracting Officer have an outside third party review the draft consultant reports submitted under Attachment 1, Task 13, Reports?

ANSWER: No, we do not have outside third parties review consultant reports.

68. QUESTION: Can you specify the names of the reports that are included in Attachment 1, Task 13?

ANSWER: These could be any report that is produced but most common are monitoring and environmental assessment reports.

69. QUESTION: Should the costs for the reports mentioned in Attachment 1, Tasks 3 and 12 be included in the pricing for those individual tasks or should they be included in Task 13, Reports?

ANSWER: Task 13-Reports.

70. QUESTION: Attachment 3 – Price Proposal, Task 14, Miscellaneous Services, CLIN 0115 for furnishing roll off bins requests a unit rate per bin. These bins are normally rented rather than purchased on a 30 day period. Should we provide a purchase price for bins, or would DLA consider monthly or daily rental rates to be responsive. If rental rates are acceptable, how many units (days or months) of bin rental would be used for the quantity for each of the three sites?

ANSWER: Assume monthly rental rates.

71. QUESTION: Attachment 3 – Price Proposal, Task 14, Miscellaneous Services, CLIN items 114 and 115 read as follows: 0114 – Furnish and fill with soil or water DOT approved 55 gallon drum, price per drum and 0115 – Furnish and fill with soil roll off bin, price per bin. Can you clarify whether you mean just providing the empty drums and bins, or if you intend to include the labor for filling these drums and bins with soil or water for disposal? Shouldn’t this labor cost be under a laborer category CLIN?

ANSWER: Labor is included in the pricing for filling the drums but not the bins.

72. QUESTION: Can all previous documents related to the sites be found on GeoTracker?

ANSWER: No, GeoTracker is not available for most states. DLA has the most recent reports and will be available for background review for the awardee.

73. QUESTION: Will travel to Fort Belvoir be required to review any reports? Or are all relevant reports available at a local repository?

ANSWER: No, travel to Fort Belvoir is not required. Most recent reports are available electronically.

74. QUESTION: Are electronic versions of these reports available to the successful bidder?

ANSWER: Yes.

75. QUESTION: Where can we review copies of the SPCC plan for the sites?

ANSWER: DLA has electronic copies and can provide them to the successful offeror(s).

76. QUESTION: Please provide the specific locations of any active projects for work off-site that is currently being undertaken under the current contract, or that might be anticipated under this contract.

ANSWER: DFSP Charleston has remediation ongoing off-site adjacent to the terminal. None at any of the other locations now or expected.

77. QUESTION: Can you provide a history of any previous emergency response actions or activities that have occurred under the current contract?

ANSWER: There are no recent emergency responses. There is a fuel spill history for each location that will be provided after contract award.

78. QUESTION: Does the DLA require or recommend a subsurface clearance protocol prior to excavation or drilling? For example, are any or all of the following steps required or recommended prior to drilling:

a. Review of site plans;

b. Review of Right-of-Way and easement documents;

c. One-call service;

d. Private geophysical utility location;

e. Soft-dig methods, such as a vacuum truck and air- or water-lance, or the use of hand tools, such as a hand auger, for the first 5 to 10 feet of the boring or excavation.

ANSWER: These steps are all to be considered before drilling and must chose the appropriate step depending on the infrastructure and location.

79. QUESTION: Regarding Attachment 7 and Volume I, Section II, ii., Scenario Response:

a. What is the elevation of the bottom invert of the tank?

b. Have there been any historical or recent releases from the adjacent tank or piping in the vicinity of the well with free phase hydrocarbons?

c. What zone is the well screened in? What is the screen length, casing diameter, elevation of the top of casing, and distance from the tank?

d. What is the free phase thickness in the well?

e. Has free phase been observed previously in this well?

f. What is the distance from the well with free phase hydrocarbons to the nearest pipeline?

g. What is the pipeline diameter, elevations of the top and bottom of pipe invert, and is it made of steel? What fuel does the pipeline convey?

h. What is the pipeline function tank fill/distribution and which tank it is connected to?

ANSWER: Offeror needs to submit their best answer and state assumptions based upon knowledge and experience responding to similar scenarios.

80. QUESTION: Does the one page limit for the sample scenario, Volume I, Section II, Subsection ii, include the detailed level of effort breakdown?

ANSWER: The one page is for the narrative. The breakdown of level of effort can go on a separate page.

81. QUESTION: Are the copies of the site closure or no further action letters from regulatory agencies requested in Volume I, Section II, Subsection iii included within the 40 page limit of Volume I – Technical Management Proposal?

ANSWER: No, they can be separate from the 40-page limit.

82. QUESTION: If a copy of the site closure or no further action letter from the regulatory agency is not available, is it acceptable to provide relevant details, including issuing regulatory agency, date, project name, client name, and purpose for the closure instead?

ANSWER: This is acceptable.

83. QUESTION: Volume I, Technical Management Proposal, Section I – Exceptions requests that exceptions taken to the Performance Work Statement should be stated here. Should the response to this section include pricing and other technical assumptions? If not, where should these assumptions be provided?

ANSWER: Assumptions can also be provided in the responses to each task in the PWS.

84. QUESTION: The RFP instructions for Volume I, Technical Management—40-page limit, to include up to 10 project descriptions in tabular form—give limited opportunity for firms to describe their competitive advantages and differentiate their services and ability to perform the contract. This provides a distinct advantage to the incumbent firms, and makes it difficult for non-incumbents to show their competitive strengths.

a. Would DLA consider revising the instructions to allow submission of more detailed qualifications and project past performance in Volume 1, Technical Management, to give non-incumbent firms a fairer opportunity to compete?

b. If the requirements are changed to allow more detailed qualifications and past performance in Volume 1, Technical Management, will additional pages be added to the page limit? If yes, how many additional pages?

ANSWER: The solicitation requires submission of assessment, remediation and emergency response experience at commercial size bulk fuel tank farms (DoD or commercial companies are equal) 10 or more projects can be submitted but the 40-page limit will not change.

85. QUESTION: Volume II, Section IV – Past Performance indicates that relevant experience of key personnel (Project Manager) may be considered and that resumes should be submitted in this section. Will resumes other than the proposed Project Managers for each of the four sites be evaluated?

ANSWER: Only the project managers’ resumes will be evaluated; however, other resumes are not discouraged.

86. QUESTION: Are there any facility security clearance requirements for any of the three sites? Would this solicitation prohibit Foreign Owned, Controlled or Influenced (FOCI) firms from competing or being selected?

ANSWER: Unless specifically prohibited by Federal regulations, there are no restrictions on FOCIs from competing or being selected.

87. QUESTION: Volume II, Section III – AbilityOne Support. While we support efforts to incorporate AbilityOne capabilities into proposals, it is difficult to determine an appropriate use on a remediation and emergency response proposal. Would DLA consider not utilizing within the current solicitation as it does not seem appropriate for a primarily field operations-related contract?

ANSWER: Offerors are required to submit a proposal addressing the AbilityOne Support. As stated in DLAD 52.215-9005, “If an offeror identifies its proposal that it is unable to utilize AbilityOne entities in a substantial manner, to a high degree, complexity level, or variety of participation, and the Contracting Officer concurs that the Contractor’s inability to provide AbilityOne opportunities is reasonable, the Offeror may still receive a rating of ‘marginal’.”

88. QUESTION: Solicitation Section K – Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors or Quoters contains additional clauses compared to Attachment 2 – 52.213-3 Offeror Representations and Certification – Commercial Items and DFARS 252.212-7000 Offeror Representations and Certification – Commercial. Specifically, Clause K-0001-K15, Release of Unit Prices (DLA ENERGY MAR 2009); K-0002- K33.01, Authorized Negotiators (DLA ENERGY APR 2007); and K-0003-K150, Wide Area Workflow (DLA ENERGY MAY 2013) are not provided in Attachment 2 to the Solicitation. Should responses to the clauses identified above be included with the responses to Attachment 2?

ANSWER: Yes, include all fill-in clauses with your proposal submittal.

Charleston, SC specific questions:

89. QUESTION: What is the availability of water for drilling at Charleston (distance and costs)?

ANSWER: This is not necessary information needed for evaluation of the offerors

90. QUESTION: How does drilling costs account for encountering boulders, heaving sands, drilling though concrete, other?

ANSWER: This is not necessary information needed for evaluation of the offerors

91. QUESTION: Do O&M costs include possibility of system failures (i.e. replacement costs) or just system maintenance?

ANSWER: This is not necessary information needed for evaluation of the offerors

92. QUESTION: Drilling subcontractors usually have contract requirements are bid out in much smaller lots than the 10,000 linear ft requested. How will this be negotiated on a task basis? Does DLA expect a single survey for the entire facility?

ANSWER: This is not necessary information needed for evaluation of the offerors

93. QUESTION: For installing and maintaining recovery wells, are the pump sizes assumed in the cost, as these will be determined following pump tests?

ANSWER: Offeror needs to state the assumed pump size in the offer.

Norfolk, VA specific questions:

91. QUESTION: Please clarify the unit of measure associated with the quantity specified in CLINs 0008 through 0010 and 0013 through 0021. Does the “10” indicate that the quantity is 10 ft or does it represent 10 events that will occur that will require drilling between the interval specified?

ANSWER: There are ranges of depth in feet in each of these CLINs.

92. QUESTION: It is our understanding that offerors must include unit prices for all CLINs identified in Attachment 3 – “Pricing Proposal Worksheet.” We also interpret that the unit prices being proposed should be for the five (5) year contract period of performance from June 1, 2014 through May 31, 2019. As such, the unit prices will be a five (5) year average for each CLIN. Are the assumptions accurate?

ANSWER: Yes, that is correct. The unit prices will be valid for the duration of the five-year contract period.

93. QUESTION: Will the “Unit Prices” identified in the Attachment 3 be the rates carried forward as the ceiling rates that will be included in Section B – Supplies/Services and Prices/Costs or will the Total Estimated Price per CLIN be the values carried forward as the ceiling rates in Section B?

ANSWER: The individual unit prices will be carried over and will be the ceiling rates for the duration of the contract (unless the labor category is subject to wage determinations).

94. QUESTION: For some of the labor CLINs, 0080 through 0107, the estimated quantities are “1” which further confuses the issue of whether the “unit price” or “estimated price per CLIN” will be carried forward as the ceiling rates for Section B. Will the “Unit Price” (rate per hour) proposed for the labor CLINs 0080 through 0107 become the ceiling labor hourly rates incorporated in Section B?

ANSWER: A one (1) indicates that DLA needs a price but cannot anticipate it will be used or it will be rarely used during the life of the contract.

95. QUESTION: If the answer to Question 3 is yes, it is not clear whether offers should use the unit prices for the last contract year (June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019) as the unit prices on Attachment 3 to cover escalation of rates over the contract period. Is this assumption correct?

ANSWER: This is not correct. The unit price being proposed by offerors will be the unit price for the duration of the five-year contract period. As stated in the answer for question #93, the only CLINs that are allowed for yearly adjustments are those labor categories subject to wage determinations.

YUNYOUNG CHO