Unalakleet_AMD_0001.pdf

WC1JUW31211867

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

This amendment for Waste Disposal Services, Unalakleet Alaska corrects typographical and administrative errors on pages 48 through 56.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 12-Jun-2013

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W911KB-13-R-0043

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-May-2013

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

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 Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer 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 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 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:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

12-Jun-2013

CODE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, AK

CEPOA-CT (W911KB)

PO BOX 6898

JBER AK 99506-0898

W911KB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W911KB-13-R-0043

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

SECTION 00 22 11

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD ONE

STEP - -LOW PRICE TECHICALLY ACCEPTABLE (LPTA)

(SINGLE AWARD)

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS, SUBFACTORS AND

ELEMENTS

5.0 VOLUME 1 – EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.1 FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

5.2 FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.3 FACTOR 3 – PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND SUMMARY SCHEDULE

6.0 PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

6.1 GENERAL

6.2 FACTOR 4 – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442, PROPOSAL DATA SHEET AND CONTRACT LINE

ITEM SCHEDULE)

6.3 BONDING CAPABILITY

6.4 SELF-PERFORMED WORK

6.5 REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

6.6 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

7.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

7.2 EVALUATION

7.3 DEFINITIONS

7.4 EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. This is a “Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA)” solicitation for the Removal, transport and disposal of PCB contaminated soil from Unalakleet, Alaska. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror, whose proposal conforms to all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable proposal.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

2.1. The Government is looking to award a Firm Fixed Priced (FFP) to the contractor providing the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable offer. In Lowest Price Technically Acceptable selection procedures, interested firms (referred to as “Offerors”) submit certain specified performance capability proposals which demonstrate their capability to successfully execute the required project resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate qualifications in accordance with the criteria described herein and will award a single contract to the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Offeror.

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.1. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Do not assume that offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

3.2. This Acquisition is set aside for Woman Owned Small Businesses (WOSB). Any WOSB firms formally organized that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal, provided that the Offeror or Offeror’s are considered Woman Owned Small Business entities.

3.3. * DELETED*

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS, SUBFACTORS AND

ELEMENTS

4.1. PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY for SOLICITATION NO. W911KB-13-R-0043

Factor/Sub Factor

Location

Description

Rating

FACTOR 1

Vol. 1 TAB A

WASTE DISPOSAL EXPERIENCE

ACCEPTABLE / UNACCEPTABLE

FACTOR 2 Vol. 1 TAB B

PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 3 Vol. 1 TAB C

PROPOSED SCHEDULE

4.2. PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Factor/Sub Facto Location Description

Rating

FACTOR 3

Vol. 2 TAB A

PRICE (Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Bid

Schedules) Low Price

N/A

Vol. 2 TAB B

Bonding Capability

Not Rated

Vol. 2 TAB C

Self-Performed Work

Vol. 2 TAB D

Required Pre-Award Information

N/A Vol. 2 TAB E Representations and Certifications

5.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.1. –FACTOR 1 – CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE

5.1.1. Submission Requirements:

5.1.1.1. The Government defines experience as what the offeror has done. The Government will evaluate the depth and breadth of an offeror's experience on the basis of projects that were similar in nature, scope, complexity, and geographically similar to the work that will be required under the contract for which offers are solicited by this RFP.

Offerors may identify state, local government, and private project experience. Both Federal Government project and non-Federal Government project experience are acceptable. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, please limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member.

To receive credit for experience, the offeror shall demonstrate a history of recent, relevant waste disposal experience. A firm will not receive credit under this factor for the relevant experience of key personnel proposed for this project. However, a firm may receive credit for relevant experience of a parent or affiliate company if the firm’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate will affect performance of the offeror.

5.1.1.2. No less than three (3) and no more than five (5) examples of projects may be presented. All projects submitted must be at least 50% complete or completed within the last six (6) years. At least two (2) of the projects must be valued at over $1,000,000.00.

Experience Matrix Featured Project

Prime Customer Loc. Cost Date Comp.

Project A Project B Project C

Construction Firm(s): Provide no less than three (3), and no more than five (5) examples of projects, demonstrating relevant and recent (within 6 years) waste disposal experience that are similar in scope to this project. Provide an explanation of how these projects are similar in scope and magnitude to the work required in this RFP.

• Experience in waste disposal for the military services (US Army, Army Corps of Engineers, US Air Force) and/or state, local, or other federal government agency in the state of Alaska.

• Experience with Waste Disposal in cold weather regions requiring expertise, understanding, and application of arctic engineering or cold regions construction and engineering techniques and methods.

• Experience in procuring appropriate containers for the transport of material to be disposed of (PCB Contaminated soil).

• Experience directly related to stream management, transportation and disposal.

• Experience in waste profile generation, manifest preparation, land disposal restriction notifications, Canadian transit notices/manifests, and all other supporting waste shipment/disposal documentation.

*Please note: Not all projects have to satisfy each experience requirement indicated in the RFP. It is incumbent upon the contractor to demonstrate experience/capability in execution of previous projects of a similar nature.

5.1.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.1.2.1. The following element will be evaluated for extent of experience.

(1) Prime/contractor.

5.1.2.2. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the prime contractor, as relevant to their role on this project. The evaluation criteria standard has been met when the contractor has demonstrated satisfactory performance as a prime contractor on at least three completed or nearly completed contracts of size and complexity as required above. *Please note: Not all projects submitted have to satisfy each experience requirement indicated in the RFP. It is incumbent upon the contractor to demonstrate experience/capability in execution of previous projects of a similar nature, and to highlight each project attribute that satisfies the experience standards in the evaluation criteria.

5.1.2.3. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Corps of Engineers Construction Contractor (or Architect-Engineer) Appraisal Support System (CCASS/ACASS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems or to interview owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

5.2. FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

5.2.1. Submission Requirements:

5.2.1.1. Past performance refers to the quality of recent project experience from the owner's perspective. The Offeror and key subcontractors shall provide customer reference name(s), submitted for specialized experience in TAB A (no separate submittal for past performance, here). The evaluation under this subfactor will be limited to projects completed or well underway (as defined above) within six (6) years preceding the date of the solicitation.

The Government will use the specific project experience sheets submitted in Tab A as part of its past performance evaluation (but the Government’s evaluation is not limited to the past performance information citied on the example projects). Include the performance rating by the owner on the form, if the Offeror was rated. The Government may contact and interview the points of contact and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed reference, if the listed reference is not available. See the Interview form at the end of this Section (Appendix 10). The team members may also provide brief information on problems encountered on identified contracts and the team member’s corrective action.

The Government places value on projects which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation; for example, but not limited to, telephone interviews with points of contacts identified in the proposal, CCASS/ACASS or other agency performance databases, offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The offeror may briefly provide information on problems encountered on identified projects and any corrective action. The offeror may also provide letters of appreciation, accommodation, or any other letters indicating successful project execution.

5.2.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.2.1. The following element will be considered under Past Performance.

(1) Prime/Construction Contractor

5.2.2.2. The Government will evaluate the quality of the offeror’s past performance record. The evaluation standard has been met when the contractor has demonstrated satisfactory performance on at least three completed or nearly completed contracts of various sizes and complexity, and that are similar to the requirements in the subject RFP. If a contractor receives a “Unsatisfactory” past performance rating for any projects identified during the past performance evaluation process, they may be afforded the opportunity to clarify any problems encountered and any corresponding corrective action taken. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management (to include timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and contractor, level of support overall execution, warranty work, etc.). The Government will not release the Past Performance Evaluation – Telephone Interview Forms to the Offeror at any time (in attempts to secure candid, unbiased interview comments).

5.2.2.3. Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant. A firm may also receive credit for relevant past performance of a parent or affiliate company if the firm’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate will affect the performance of the offeror. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the projects identified by the offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance risk will be considered “unknown”. The Government may be unable to obtain much, if any, qualitative information on past performance from references for efforts performed as a subcontractor on submitted projects due to the Government’s or other owner’s lack of privity with subcontractors.

5.3. FACTOR 3 – PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND SUMMARY MILESTONE SCHEDULE

5.3.1. Submission Requirements:

5.3.1.1. Proposed Contract Duration: The Offeror shall propose the contract duration, not to exceed the maximum contract duration specified herein , and a schedule narrative.

5.3.1.2 Summary Milestone Schedule: Submit a summary level milestone schedule for transport and disposal. The summary milestone schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a final project schedule as required per the RFP. The summary milestone schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved.

(a) Provide a narrative, describing the required transport and disposal activities required for completion of the subject project. Show the overall phase for transportation, and for disposal and final reporting.

(b) Time to complete the project and turn over to the Government must consider the requirement for the Contractor’s CQC completion inspection and the subsequent turnover inspection.

5.3.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.3.2.1. The following element will be considered under Past Performance.

(1) Prime/Construction Contractor

5.3.2.2. Proposed Contract Duration: This duration will become the contractually binding completion period. The Government will evaluate the contract duration, as proposed by the Offeror in the Contract Line Item Schedule, not to exceed the maximum allowed duration of 365 calendar days. The evaluation standard has been met when the contractor’s proposed duration is determined to be realistic and deemed achievable during independent evaluation concerning logic, constraints, and typical project related durations. The Government will negatively consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government or which may create a risk of contractor or performance failure.

5.3.2.3. Summary Schedule: The Government will evaluate the summary schedule to assess the strength of understanding of the project scope, project restrictions, major milestones, and overall understanding of the project requirement. The evaluation standard has been met when the contractor’s detailed schedule narrative details activities and project milestones that are logical, reasonable, and achievable. The evaluation standard has been met when the contractor’s summary schedule shows a concrete understanding of the scope, restrictions, major milestones, and general understanding of the various events that can affect the completion of the project

6.0 PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

6.1. GENERAL

Submit the Pro Forma information in a separate envelope labeled: “Volume 2 - Pro Forma Requirements.”

6.2. FACTOR 3 – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 33, PROPOSAL DATA SHEET AND CONTRACT LINE ITEM

SCHEDULE)

6.2.1. Submission Requirements:

6.2.1.1. Submit the properly filled out and executed SF 33, along with the CLIN Schedule, containing proposed line item and total pricing, as well as the proposed contract duration. See instructions in Section 00 21 00, “Instructions to Offerors”. Submit the Proposal Data Sheet, Attachment 10.

6.2.1.2. Supplemental Price Breakdown. If deemed necessary to evaluate the price proposals, the Government will request a price breakdown of the Contract Line items in a sealed envelope marked “Price Breakdown Information”, in Excel format. The Government will provide details on where and how to send the breakdown. This information will not be needed sooner than three working days after the proposal submission due date. This information may be required for any revised proposals. This information is not an opportunity for an offeror to revise its non-price or price proposal.

6.2.2.2 Price will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis. The price evaluators will also check for appearance of unbalanced line item prices. Offerors are cautioned to distribute direct costs, such as material, labor, equipment, subcontracts, etc. and to evenly distribute indirect costs, such as job overhead, home office overhead, bond, etc., to the appropriate contract line items. Both parties shall presume that field overhead costs through the proposed contract duration are inclusive in the offered price for the contract.

6.2.2.3. If deemed necessary, the supplemental price breakdown information will be used to assist the Government in performing the price evaluations described above.

6.2.2.4. Award cannot be made for project cost exceeding the cost limitation described herein.

6.3. BONDING CAPABILITY

6.3.1. Submission Requirements:

The requirement for a proposal bond is waived for this project. However, offerors must submit a letter from their bonding company indicating the offeror’s ability to obtain performance and payment bonds in the amount of their proposal price.

6.3.2. Evaluation requirements:

This item is not rated.

6.4. SELF-PERFORMED WORK

6.4.1. Submission Requirements:

6.4.1.1. The Offeror shall confirm that it understands and that it shall perform the amount of work required to be self-performed, in accordance with the appropriate clause in Section 00 72 00 that applies to the contract performance (see Section 00 73 00 for a description of the applicable clause for self-performance of work).

6.4.2. Evaluation Requirements:

This is a ACCEPTABLE / UNACCEPTABLE requirement. In order to assure adequate interest in and supervision of all work, the Contractor shall be required to perform a significant part of the contract with its own forces. This public policy is expressed in various Statutes, as well as in the Federal Acquisition Regulations and in the Small Business Administration Code of Federal Regulations. The Offeror must confirm that it understands the amount of work performed, based on the status of the offeror, and that it will self perform the required amount of work with its own forces. For purposes of these clauses, work that is performed off-site, such as, example only, factory fabrication or factory assembly of modules, or direct design work, may also be taken into account as self-performed work.

6.5. REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

6.5.1. Submission Requirements:

6.5.1.1. Submit this information for the Contracting Officer’s determination of offeror responsibility, which includes, but is not limited to the following:

(1) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value thereof, and name of the organization under which the work is being performed. Include names and telephone numbers of personnel within each organization who are familiar with the prospective contractor’s performance.

(2) A certified statement listing; (1) each contract awarded within the preceding three month period exceeding $1,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract; and (2) each contract awarded within the preceding three year period not already physically completed and exceeding $5,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract.

(3) If the prospective contractor is a joint venture, each joint venture member will be required to submit the above defined certification.

6.5.1.2. One copy of the following information shall be provided:

(1) Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities)

(2) Number of years the firm has been in business

(3) Name, address and telephone number of firm’s bonding company

(4) Information showing offeror’s bondability for this project.

(5) Name, address and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references.

6.5.2. Evaluation Criteria:

In addition to the other proposal information, the Contracting Officer shall use this information in making an affirmative responsibility determination for award to the Successful Offeror, in accordance with FAR Part 9.

6.6. REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

6.6.1 Complete and submit the Representations and Certifications included in Section 00 45 00.

6.6.2. Evaluation requirements: This item is not rated.

7.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

7.1.1. The SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation.

The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal and any subsequent discussions required, as well as information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any information incorporated by reference.

7.2. EVALUATION

7.2.1. The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor, except that performance risk ratings are assigned to past performance (see below).

7.2.2. The Government intends to award without discussions. A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the most highly rated proposals in the event that discussions with offerors are required or considered to be in the Government’s best interests. In such an event, the Contracting Officer will establish a competitive range of all the most highly rated proposals.

7.2.3. If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give and take with each offeror in the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 15.306 (d). The Government will provide the Offeror an advance agenda for the discussions. During discussions, the Government may ask the Offeror to further explain its proposal and to answer questions about it.

7.2.4. Upon conclusion of discussions, those offerors still considered the most highly rated, will be afforded an opportunity to submit their proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection.

7.3. EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

7.3.1. Adjective Ratings: The following adjective ratings will be used in the evaluation of three (3) evaluation factors.

7.3.2. Unacceptable (U): The proposal fails to meet stated criteria

7.3.3. Acceptable (A): The proposal essentially satisfies the standards; minor weaknesses, even if not corrected, do not render this proposal/factor unacceptable.

7.4 BASIS OF AWARD

The award shall be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for all non-cost factors. Proposals receiving an unacceptable rating in any of the evaluation factors will be excluded from consideration for award.

(End of Summary of Changes)