W9123822R0011 Amend 0001.pdf

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

A. The purpose of this amendment is to make solicitation corrections based on bidder inquiries.

B. Except as noted in the follow ing pages, all other terms and conditions remain the same.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 33

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 29-Dec-2021

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 W9123822R0011

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10-Dec-2021

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 X is extended, 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 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 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

29-Dec-2021

CODE

USACE SACRAMENTO DISTRICT

ATTN: CONTRACTING DIVISION

1325 J STREET

SACRAMENTO CA 95814-2922

W91238 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9123822R0011

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 10-Jan-2022 03:00 PM to 13-Jan-

2022 05:00 PM.

The following have been modified:

INQUIRIES – OFFEROR’S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

USE OF BIDDER’S INQUIRY

Prospective offerors should submit questions and inquiries related to this solicitation in accordance with the following (collect calls will not be accepted):

a. For information related to amendments, and the dates set for receipt of proposals, please check https://beta.sam.gov/

b. Contractual and Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures are to be submitted via Bidder

Inquiry in ProjNet at https://www.projnet.org/projnet.

1. To submit and review bid inquiry items, offerors will need to be a current registered user or self-register into the system. To self-register go to the web page and click on the

BID tab. Select Bidder Inquiry, select agency USACE, and enter the Bidder Inquiry Key for this solicitation listed below, your e-mail address, and then click login. Fill in all required information and click create user. Verify that information on next screen is correct and click continue.

2. From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add an inquiry.

3. Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via e-mail, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed.

4. The Solicitation Number is: W91238-22-R-0011

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: PWI6ZT-37S6YW

5. The Solicitation Due date is January 13, 2022 17:00 Pacific Time https://beta.sam.gov/ https://www.projnet.org/projnet

c. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries 10 days prior to proposal due date to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

d. Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety and review the Bidder Inquiry

System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

e. The call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

f. Offers will NOT be publicly opened. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of proposals.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 3032 is added as follows:

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

3032 12 Months OPTION Hazardous Waste Contract Support

FFP

Section 3.5.1 of the PWS

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

The following Acceptance/Inspection Schedule was added for CLIN 3032:

INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

N/A N/A N/A Government

SECTION G - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

1.0 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

The following subsections specify requirements for contract, management, and personnel administration.

1.1 Government Management

The following will be contacts for Government Management for this contract.

1.1.1 Contracting Office

The contracting Office associated with this contract is:

U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Sacramento

Contracting Division

1325 J Street

Sacramento, CA 95814-2922

1.1.2 Program Manger

The Government Program Manager associated with this contract is:

Mr. Joe Lipka

United States Army Corp of Engineers, Sacramento District

Environmental Section

1325 J Street

1.1.3 Contracting Officer Representative

The Contracting Officer Representative appointed to this contract is:

To Be Determined

1.1.4 Technical Support

The Technical POC’s will serve as the ‘Subject Matter Experts’ for the following eight (8) environmental media areas. The Technical POCs may answer technical questions the contractor may have regarding the specific tasks included in Section C of this Contract. The Technical

POCs do not have the authority to modify or change any part of this contract and should be used for clarifications only.

The Government’s Technical Points of Contact associated with this contract are:

1.1.4.1 Technical POC for Air Quality

1.1.4.2. Technical POC for EPCRA Reporting

1.1.4.3 Technical POS for Water Quality and Storage

1.1.4.4 Spill Response

1.1.4.5 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

1.1.4.6 Hazardous Waste

1.1.4.7 Solid Waste (Qualified Recycling Program)

1.1.4.8 Hazardous Materials

1.2 Invoices

The Contractor shall develop and submit invoices monthly, unless otherwise approved by the

USACE COR, based on completion of contract deliverables defined in this contract. Successful achievement of the performance objectives and completion of contract deliverables is attained upon receipt of COR approval of the relevant documentation provided. In the event there are multiple performance objectives and/or deliverables for the performance of this contract , partial payments will be based on the successful completion of those performance objectives. Final decisions regarding the achievement of the performance objectives ad deliverable completion resides with the USACE Contracting Officer and Contracting Officer Representative.

1.2.1 Invoice Submittal

With each invoice, the contractor shall provide a Monthly Status Report in electronic format by the end of the first week of every month that reflects the activities completed by the Contractor the previous month.

The contractor shall submit invoices in a format that includes the following information:

• CLINs (Contract Line Item Numbers),

• CEFMS PR&C and PR&C Line Number,

• Task/Subtask Name (note, tasks should follow the Task number system in the PWS),

• Budgeted Amount (Contract Amount),

• Total Earnings to Date (including current invoice)

• Percent Complete to Date (including current invoice),

• Previously Paid to Date,

• Total Earnings this Period (Invoice Amount),

• Amount Due to Contractor

After Contracting Officer Representative approval the contractor shall submit invoices to:

USACE, FINANCE CETER

Attn, CEFC-FP

5722 Integrity Drive

Millington TN, 38054-5005

U.S. Army Corp Of Engineers

Attn, Anastasia Bandi

1325 J Street

Email: anastasia.c.rodarte@usace.army.mil

U.S, Army Corp of Engineers

Attn, Ronda English

1325 J Street

Email: ronda.english@usace.army.mil

U.S. Army Corp of Engineers

Attn, Joseph Lipka

1325 J Street

Email: Joseph.T.Lipka@usace.army.mil

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICIES/EXHIBITS

A. SOLICITATION SECTION C PWS - APPENDICES

1. Appendix A – CDRL

2. Appendix B – Building Layouts

B. SOLICITATION SECTION L&M – ATTACHEMENTS

1. Attachment 1 – Past Performance Questionnaire

2. Attachment 2 – Wage Determination

3. Attachment 3 – Small Business Participation Proposal

4. Attachment 4 - Hill BIEST Pricing Sheet_v1 mailto:anastasia.c.rodarte@usace.army.mil mailto:ronda.english@usace.army.mil mailto:Joseph.T.Lipka@usace.army.mil

C. TECHNICAL EXHIBITS

All Tech Exhibits and reference documents will be provided via request through DoD

Safe.

1. Technical Exhibit A -Hill Air Force Base Annual Criteria and Hazardous Air

Pollutant Emissions Inventory – March 2021

2. Technical Exhibit B – Hill Air Force Base Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR)

2020 Annual Criteria and Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions Inventory – March

3. Technical Exhibit C – Hill Air Force Base Storm Drain Marker Areas – October 2021

4. Technical Exhibit D - Hill Air Force Base Air Quality Emergency Episode Plan –

July 2016

5. Technical Exhibit E – Hill Air Force Base Air Quality Emergency Episode Plan for

Utah Test and Training Range – July 2016

6. Technical Exhibit F – Hill Air Force Base Impact of the Risk Management Plan and

General Duty Clause Regulations on Hill Air Force Base Operations – February 2021

7. Technical Exhibit G – Hill Air Force Base Main Base Greenhouse Gas Monitoring

Plan

8. Technical Exhibit H – Hill Air Force Base Dry Weather Screening Plan – April 15,

9. Technical Exhibit I – Hill Air Force Base Integrated Contingency Plan Overview

10. Technical Exhibit J – Hill Air Force Base Quantity and Quality of Industrial Waste

Collection System (IWCS) Discharges - March 2021

11. Technical Exhibit K - Hill Air Force Base Monthly Compliance Report Analytical

Results – July 2020

12. Technical Exhibit L – Hill Air Force Base Utah Hazardous Waste Storage Permit –

September 2020

13. Technical Exhibit M – Hill Air Force Base Hazardous Waste Management Plan –

January 2021

14. Technical Exhibit N – Hill Air Force Base Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan

– January 2021

15. Technical Exhibit O – State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Quality – UPDES Permit UTR090000 – May 2021

16. Technical Exhibit P – State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of

Water Quality Multi Sector General Permit – June 2020

17. Technical Exhibit Q - Hill Air Force Base Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan –

June 2020

18. Technical Exhibit R – Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory – Little

Mountain Test Annex – February 2021

19. Technical Exhibit S – Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory – Hill Air

Force Base – February 2021

20. Technical Exhibit T – State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality – Title V

Operating Permit – January 2020

21. Technical Exhibit U – North Davis Sewer District Industrial Discharge Permit –

January 2018

22. Technical Exhibit V – Hill Air Force Base Stormwater Management Plan – August

23. Technical Exhibit W – Hill Air Force Base Utah Test and Training Range Spill

Management Plan – March 2021

24. Technical Exhibit X – Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory – Utah Test and Training Range – February 2021

25. Technical Exhibit Y – Department of Environmental Quality Operating Permit

Application for Hill Air Force Base & Utah Test and Training Range – August 2017

D. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

All reference documents can be accessed online using the appropriate URL’s

1. Main Base Title V – A Renewal Application has been submitted to the State of Utah and the new Title V permit can be issued at any time. Below is a link to the State of

Utah, Division of Air Quality, Permitting Website where more information can be found:

a. https://daqpermitting.utah.gov/

2. Utah Test and Training Range Title V Permit - A Renewal Application has been submitted to the State of Utah and the new Title V permit can be issued at any time.

Below is a link to the State of Utah, Division of Air Quality, Permitting Website where more information can be found:

3. Approval Orders for Main Base and UTTR – There are 41 AO’s for Hill AFB and the

UTTR listed on the UDAQ website by searching the link below:

4. Part B Hazardous Waste Operations Permit

a. https://deq.utah.gov/businesses-facilities/hill-air-force-base-waste-permit

5. Hazardous Waste Storage Permit

a. https://deq.utah.gov/businesses-facilities/hill-air-force-base-waste-permit

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO CONTRACTOR

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

https://daqpermitting.utah.gov/ https://daqpermitting.utah.gov/ https://daqpermitting.utah.gov/ https://deq.utah.gov/businesses-facilities/hill-air-force-base-waste-permit https://deq.utah.gov/businesses-facilities/hill-air-force-base-waste-permit

The U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE), Sacramento District intends to award a Firm Fixed

Price (FFP) contract for Base Integrated Environmental Support Tasks (BIEST) at Hill Air Force

Base, Utah using competitive, “best value” trade-off source selection process. From this solicitation a contract will be awarded to an Offeror whose proposal is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, price, and other factors considered. The government may not award any contract if the resulting contract would not represent a “best value” to the Government using trade-off selection procedures as required by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations

(DFARS). The resulting FFP contract will be awarded in accordance with Far Part 15 and applicable supplements, guidance, and instructions. All non-price technical evaluation Factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. It is strongly suggested that the provisions stated in the RFP information be fully studied prior to assembly of the proposal.

To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation Factors. The offeror shall submit in their proposal all information specified in this section of the RFP solicitation at or before the exact time specified. There will be no public opening of the proposals received because of this solicitation. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award.

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is

541620, environmental Consulting Services, with a small business size standard of $16.5 identified by the U.S. Small Business Administration.

If the Contractor believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or otherwise unsound, the Contractor shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer or

Contract Specialist in writing (email is the preferred method) with supporting rationale. The

Contractor is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received without discussions.

The Contracting Officer (KO) and the Contract Specialist are the Sole points of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have, that are not appropriate for

Bidders Inquiry, to the contract specialist who will then communicate the concerns with the KO.

Written concerns shall be sent to the e-mail address below. The Contract Specialist for this acquisition is as follows:

Contract Specialist: Mr. Joseph Warby

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District

Utah Regional Office

Layton, Utah

Email: joseph.d.warby@usace.army.mil

Contracting Officer: Mr. Daniel Czech

U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Sacramento District

Sacramento District Office

Sacramento, California mailto:joseph.d.warby@usace.army.mil

Email: Daniel.e.czech@usace.army.mil

1.2 DEBRIFINGS

The KO will notify Offerors excluded from the competitive range or otherwise excluded from the competition before award, if a competitive range is established. Upon such notice, the

Offeror may request a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. Offerors may request a pre-award debriefing or delay its debriefing until after award provided such a request is submitted in compliance with FAR 15.505. However, it shall be noted that the Offeror will receive no more than one debriefing for this acquisition.

The KO will notify all Offerors in the competitive range, if a competitive range is established, of the source selection decision. Upon such notification, the Offerors may request a post-award debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.506.

1.3 ORAL PRESENTATIONS

As part of the RFP, the Government reserves the right to conduct oral presentations, if necessary.

1.4 COMMUNICATIONS

Exchanges of information between the Government and Offerors will be controlled by the

Contract Specialist and/or the Contracting Officer.

1.5 COVER LETTER

Each Offeror shall include a Cover Letter in Volume I that identifies: the name, title, telephone number, email of the company/division point of contact (POC) regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government with respect to this procurement and provide their names, titles, telephone numbers, and email.

2.0 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS – ORGANIZATION PROPOSAL SUBMISSION/PAGE

LIMITS

This request for proposal (RFP) does not commit the Government to any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal or for any other costs incurred by your firm submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation. Note specifically that the Contractor will not be participating in a sealed bid procurement process under this acquisition method. Issuance of the

Request for Proposal does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the government.

The Government reserves the right to discuss aspects of proposals with Offerors in the competitive range, if one is determined to be necessary, upon completion of the evaluation, and to award a contract to other than the Offeror submitting the lowest priced offer. Offerors are advised that the Government may make award without discussions, clarifications, or any contact concerning the proposals received. Therefore, proposals shall be submitted 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.

2.1 PROPOSAL VOLUMES

Each Offeror shall submit a proposal that consists of two Volumes:

mailto:Daniel.e.czech@usace.army.mil

Volume I – Technical Proposal

Volume II – Cost/Price Proposal

2.2 VOLUME/PAGE LABELING PREPARATION

Volumes I and II may not be submitted together within the same binding (separate submissions are required). Each Volume shall include, as a minimum, the following:

a. Volume number and volume name on proposal cover (I.e., Volume I – Technical Proposal).

b. The prime, consortium, or joint venture’s name, address, and a telephone number shall appear in the lower left corner of the proposal cover.

c. A table of Contents, which provides a cross-reference of the Offeror’s proposal to the applicable sections of the solicitation.

d. List of tables/figures.

e. Volume number, section and date submitted shall appear in the bottom right corner of each page (along with the revision number for the amended page, if necessary).

f. The Offeror shall ensure that a complete Volume I and Volume II is submitted, separately, as a .pdf document, each inclusive of all documents for the respective Volume.

Be sure to apply all appropriate markings, as applicable, including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1€, “Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data”

2.3 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

HARD COPY PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED

THE ONLY AUTHOIZED TRANSMISSION METHOD FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSLAS

IN REPONSE TO THIS SOLICITATION IS THROUGH THE PROJNET WEBSITE AT

https://www.projnet.org/projnet. NO OTHER TRANSMISSION METHODS (EMAIL, FACSIMILE, REGULAR MAIL, HAND CARRIED, ETC.) WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Proposal submission shall be uploaded to the ProjNet website by the identified date and time. To submit a proposal, the firm must submit a drop-off request for each transmission to joseph.d.warby@usace.army.mil. Once the drop off request is made, you will receive an email with a link to submit a drop-off. The drop-off request is valid for 14 days, at which time it will expire.

FIRMS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO READ THE PROJENET WEBSITE

INSTURCTIONS AND FAQS TO SUBMIT THEIR DROP OFF REQUEST AT LEAST 10

DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE SUBMITTAL DUE DATE.

2.3.1 ELECTRONIC FILE SUBMISSION ORGANIZATION

Offerors shall submit their proposals in response to this RFP via ProjNet in two (2) separate transmissions to the identified USACE receivers.

a. The first transmission will consist of all electronic files relating to Volume I – Technical

Proposal. Offerors shall ensure their company name is within the file name of each document mailto:joseph.d.warby@usace.army.mil transmitted. Both PDF and dative file versions of documents must be submitted (i.e., Word, MS

Project, etc.).

b. The second transmission will consist of all electronic files relating to Volume II – Cost/Price.

Offerors shall ensure their company name is within the file name of each document transmitted.

Both pdf and native file versions of documents shall be submitted (i.e., Word, Excel, etc.)

All the proposal files may be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled proposal zip using the latest version of WinZip or 9-Zip, or as separate uploads. The USACE utilizes Microsoft 365.

Ensure files are compatible and viewable in Microsoft 365 format. Self-extracting exe files are not acceptable.

NOTE: In accordance with FAR subpart 4.8, “Government Contract Files,” the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals.

2.3.2 PROJNET WEBSITE AND SUBMISSION RECEIVER INFORMATION:

PROJNET site at https://www.projnet.org/projnet

The Solicitation Number is: W91238-22-R-0011

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: PWI6ZT-37S6YW

2.3.3 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DATE/TIME:

Proposals shall be received not later than 1700 hours (5:00 p.m.) Pacific

Daylight Time on January, 13, 2022.

(NOTE: Offerors are cautioned to allow sufficient time for their proposals’ files to upload, transmit and time stamp by PROJNET. Therefore, waiting until the last minute to attempt transmission of your proposal could result in your proposal being deemed late due to the websites’ s slow performance, etc.)

2.3.4 RECIEPT OF PROPOSAL

For the purposes of establishing whether a proposal is considered late, the Government considers

(the earlier of) the date and time of receipt of the ProjNet website email notification of the last proposal submission to the Contract Specialist, NOT the date and time of uploading of the proposal into the ProjNet website as the time of proposal submission.

For Proposals larger than the 8GB capacity of the ProjNet website and require multiple submissions, the Government will consider the date and time of receipt of the mail notification to the Contract Specialist.

Do not assume that electronic communications are instantaneous. It can take several minutes or even hours in some cases. Per Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR 15.208 any proposal modification, or revision, thereof that is received after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals is “late” and will not be considered.

The Government will not be responsible for proposals delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals on its behalf. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that proposals are submitted to reach the designated recipient of proposals. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be received in accordance with the instructions provided.

2.4 PAGE FORMAT RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Page limitations shall include typewritten text pages, graphs, diagrams, schematics, etc., aside from those items specifically stated as exempt from the page count. Outlines and other similar information documents shall be included as numbered pages – no exceptions. The total number of pages for the Volume I submittal shall not exceed fifty (50) pages. Compliance with page count limits shall be verified via the pdf version of the Volume I submission. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Page limitations remain in effect when revisions are made in response to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if issued.

2.4.1 PAGES COUNTED

Each page shall be counted except the following: Cover Pages, Executing Summary Performance

Management Plan, Quality Assurance Plan, table of contents, title page, list of tables/figures/acronyms, list of appendices, glossaries, blank pages, Past Performance

Questionnaires, Resumes, Example Project’s Schedule, Contractor Teaming Agreements, and

Volume II in its entirety.

2.4.2 PAGE SIZE

Unless otherwise stated a “page” is defined as being one (1) 8.5” x 11” sheet of paper. Pages shall be fully legible with a minimum of 10-point font. A small font size (minimum of 8 point and fully legible) may be used on charts, graphs, figures, diagrams, and schematics to accommodate a “make to fit” software capability., however, all text shall be legible and easily read by a reasonable person. Margins on all four edges of each sheet will be at least one inch

(margins or figures, maps, and schedules may be reduced to no less than half inch. Proprietary statement, security markings, and page numbers can fall within the defined margin area. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall apply to responses to EN responses (if required), as well as to the initial proposal.

2.4.3. INDEXING

Each Volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that Volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

2.4.4 LARGER PAGES

Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible and shall not exceed 11” x 17” in size. Each page up to and including 11 x 17 will count as one page. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the font shall be no smaller than 8 point and fully legible, with the font style utilized being the offeror’s choice; however, all text shall be legible and easily read by a reasonable person. All information (except documentation identification, solicitation number, and page numbers) shall be contained within an image area of the previously stated margins.

2.5 PROPOSAL FORMAT

The offeror’s proposal shall be assembled (electronically) in the format shown below:

ASSEMBLY INSTUCTIONS

TABLE 1

PROPOSAL FORMAT

Volume Tab Title Maximum # of Pages

Volume I – Technical Proposal

I N/A Cover Letter/Executive Summary N/A

N/A Performance Management Plan N/A

N/A Quality Assurance Program N/A

1 Factor 1 –Technical Expertise –

Technical Capability

50 Page Count Total Limit (Cover

Letter/executive summary PMP, and QAP excluded from page count)

2 Factor 2 – Mission Capability

3 Factor 3 – Past Performance

4 Factor 4 – Small Business

Participation

5 Teaming Arrangement, if applicable

N/A

Volume II – Cost/Price Proposal

II 1 Factor 5 – Cost/Price Evaluation No Limit

2 Representations

3 Preaward Survey

3.0 VOLUME I, TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Volume I of the proposal shall include a Cover Letter/Executive Summary, a Performance

Management Plan (PMP), and a Quality Assurance Program (QAP) which shall include the information identified in Section 1.5 as well as an Introduction to the proposal’s team. The Cover letter/Executive Summary, PMP, and QAP shall not be included from the fifty (50) page limitation.

3.1 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

The PMP shall include elements that allows the contractor to manage the performance of its workforce. It could include goals, expectations, progress assurance, performance assessments, and a plan to act if goals/expectations, and performances are not met.

3.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

The QAP shall include elements that evaluate the offeror’s approach for ensuring the performance of each individual tasks identified within the PWS. The offeror’s plan shall include how the standards and levels of performance in the PWS will be maintained throughout the life of the contract. The plan should include:

• Identification of personnel responsible for quality control

• A description of the offeror’s inspection system with types and frequencies of inspection to be conducted and personnel responsible for conducting inspections.

• A system for preventing the occurrences or recurrences of deficiencies

• A description of how inspections will be documented with sample inspection records for each type of inspection to be conducted.

3.2a VOLUME I FACTOR 1 – TECHNCIAL CAPABILITY

The Offeror’s proposal must show an overall technical ability to successfully complete and perform the 9 Competencies within the PWS. The proposal should include their ability to follow and incorporate all the appropriate laws and regulations for the following competencies.

• Air Quality

• Hazardous Waste

• Solid Waste / Qualified Recycling Program

• Hazardous Materials

• EPCRA Reporting

• Water Quality

• Environmental Management Systems

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

• Spill Response

3.3 VOLUME I FACTOR 2 – MISSION CAPABILITY

The Offeror’s proposal must demonstrate a sound, effective approach for capturing and retaining expertise in the workforce. This includes Key

Personnel, Personnel Qualifications, and Experience. The proposal should include an organizational structure and staffing, scheduling, and other detailed manning data, concepts or approach that demonstrates a sound business approach of organizing, staffing, training, leading, planning, coordinating, and controlling resources to meet the requirements of the PWS for successful contract execution.

3.3.1 KEY PERSONNEL

The Offeror’s proposal must present a clear and succinct, and comprehensive organizational structure that encompasses the contractor’s management plan in narrative and graphic format.

The organizational structure shall include all the key personnel assigned across the 9 environmental media listed in the PWS.

The Offeror’s proposal demonstrates an appropriate level of personnel resource across the range of skills required to accomplish the mission. The proposal addresses any proposed cross-utilization of personnel, and the mechanisms to be employed to accomplish the requirements in the PWS.

3.3.2. PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

The Offerors proposal must propose qualified personnel. The evaluation of qualified personnel will consider education, qualifications, and registration, where applicable, and accomplishments/successes in executing and providing environmental consulting services.

3.3.3 EXPERIENCE

The Offeror’s proposal must provide a summary utilizing past projects and or contracts that the offeror has successfully completed or substantially completed within the last five (5) years that demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to manage a contract with the same size and scope of the requirements listed in the PWS.

VOLUME I FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The past performance evaluation considers an offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying services required by this RFP. In accordance with FAR

15.305(a)(2), the currency of relevance and confidence of the information, source of the information, contest of the data, and the general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered.

3.5.1 REQUIRED RELEVANCY OF PAST EXPERIENCE PROJECTS

The Offeror shall submit past projects that include the 9 competencies (listed in 3.4) as possible to demonstrate the organizations/team’s Past Experience, ensuring each project meets the relevance requirements to the Section C PWS of this request for proposal. The projects are to be the same projects required under the experience element of the mission capability factor.

3.5.2 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

For each submitted project, the Offeror shall request a Past Performance Questionnaire, found in

Attachment 1, from those Government agencies or private sector companies’ Point of Contact identified for each project. These agency or company contacts must have detailed information concerning the performance of the project to accurately complete the past performance questionnaire for the Offeror. The POCs may be contact by the SSEB to assess the scope of work performed and to evaluate performance of the projects listed as previous experience. It is therefore imperative to ensure correct telephone and email addresses are identified for each

POCs on each questionnaire.

Completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) shall be submitted with your proposal if they are able to be received from the POC prior to the proposal due date. Offerors shall follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. Please note: the offeror may submit Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) records in lieu of PPQs.

In addition to the questionnaires, the Government may review and consider any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval

System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information

System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror (including information from Government personnel and databases).

3.6 VOLUME I FACTOR 4 - SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION PLAN

The Offeror shall submit a small business plan that applies to the offeror’s expected small business concerns. The small business participation shall be provided in the format of

Attachment 3 of this solicitation. The plan will be evaluated on an adjectival listed in

Section M. Overall Small Business participation Goal is 20% with a 5% goal of Small

Disadvantaged Business Concerns.

4.0 VOLUME II

The Offeror shall submit, in Volume II, the completed pricing sheet attached to this solicitation as well as the cost/price schedule consisting of all Labor Rates, Annual

Escalation, Overhead, G&A, and assumptions used to determine the overall proposal.

The offeror’s proposed pricing sheet, etc. will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness using price analysis techniques, such as those in FAR 15.404-1(b). The government reserves the right to use Cost Analysis techniques described in FAR 15.404-

1(c) when a fair and reasonable price cannot be determined through price analysis alone.

The burden of proof for reasonableness rests with the offeror.

4.0a Representations and Certificatiosn

The offeror shall submit the representations and certification from Section K as a separate tab in Volume II.

4.1 Preaward Survey

4.1.1 The Contracting Officer is required to make an affirmative pre-award determination of the prospective contractor’s responsibility in accordance with the mandatory requirements of Part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and its supplements. The Contracting Officer must have sufficient information available to determine that a prospective contractor meets these minimum standards. Therefore, the offeror is requested to provide the pre-award survey information described below with its price proposal:

4.1.1.1 The completed Contractor Data Form with Supplemental Schedules A-C (see format which follows). If the offeror is a large multi-segmented business concerns, the data provided on the supplemental schedules may be limited to information that directly pertains to the specific segment of the business concern (e.g., the division, group, unit, etc.) proposed to perform work under the prospective contract with its own work force. If the offer is being submitted by a Joint Venture, submit a separate form for each Joint Venture participant. The offeror may submit pre-award survey information in another format, provided that the information furnished is substantially the same as that which would be furnished on the Construction Contractor Data Form and its supplemental schedules.

4.1.1.2 Current financial statements. If the financial statement is more than 60 days old, submit a certificate stating that the firm's financial condition is substantially the same, or, if not the same, state the changes that have taken place. If a Joint Venture, provide this information for each participant in the

Joint Venture.

4.1.1.3 Banking information. Provide letters from banks or other financial institutions with which the contractor conducts business. The letters should contain information about your firm's accounts, loans, lines of credit, etc. The

Government is interested in financial stability, timely payments, the length and nature of the relationship between the firm and the financial institution, and the firm's financial ability to perform the contract. The letters should also provide the name and telephone number of the bank representative the

Government may contact. If a Joint Venture, provide this information for each Joint Venture participant.

4.1.2 The Government will treat the pre-award survey information submitted by the offeror as proprietary.

CONTRACTOR DATA FORM DATE:

Firm Name and Telephone Number Main Office Address (Street, City, and State)

Branch Offices Services Rendered

Constructi on Design

Consultant Organization

Individual Joint Venture

Partnership Corporation

Date Organized Date Incorporated:

State:

Names of Officers and Other Key Personnel

I – PRESENT PAYROLL PERSONNEL (List Number of Each Category Below) Partners:

Officers:

Other

Key:

Remainder: Subtotal Permanent:

Maximum Personnel at Any

Time: Date:

Total:

II—EQUIPMENT OWNED III—FINANCIAL DATA AS OF

(DATE): Present Value ($)

Current Assets:

Acquisition Cost ($) Current Liabilities:

Net Worth:

IV—TOTAL VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION AND

DEMOLITION WORK

IN PAST 6 YRS EXCLUSIVE OF JOINT VENTURE

(LIST MOST RECENT FIRST)

V—LARGEST JOB EVER

CONTRACTED

(If Other Than in Past Six Years) $ LARGEST JOB IN PAST 6 YRS Contract Amount:

Date:

Descriptio n:

Owner:

$ Contract Amount:

Date:

Descriptio n:

Owner:

Avg. Annual Income

VI—TYPE OF WORK IN WHICH FIRM SPECIALIZES

NAME AND POSITION/TITLE OF PERSON

SIGNING

SIGNATURE

See attachment for explanations or detailed description of item(s) reported above.

CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE A – EXISTING COMMITMENTS

List below the projects your firm currently has under way, including recent awards. Also list projects for which your firm is the apparent successful offeror/bidder, but for which a contract has not yet been awarded.

CONTRA

CT

NUMBER

AMOUNT

DESCRIPTIO

N/

LOCATION

ORGANIZATION

/ CONTACT

PERSON/ PHONE

PERCENT

COMPLE

TE

CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE B – COMPLETED PROJECTS

List below the principal environmental projects your firm has completed within the past six years, including all DoD contracts with a total value exceeding $10,000,000.00.

AMOUNT

DESCRIPTIO

N/

LOCATION

ORGANIZATION

/ CONTACT

PERSON/ PHONE

PERCEN

T

SUBLET

CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE C –

EQUIPMENT

List total equipment and facilities owned for performing the prospective contract and present status as to whether or not it is currently committed to existing contracts.

QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION

CONDITION

YEARS

OF

SERVICE

PRESEN

T

STATUS

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 SOURCE SELECTION

All offerors received in response to this RFP will be evaluated in accordance with requirements of Section “L” and this Section “M.” The principal purpose of this evaluation process is to award a Firm-Fixed Price contract for Base Integrated Environmental Support Tasks (BIEST) at Hill

Air Force Base, Utah using a competitive, “best value” trade-off source selection process. From this solicitation a contract will be awarded to an Offeror whose proposal is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, price, and other factors considered. The government may not award any contract if the resulting contract would not represent a “best value” to the

Government using trade-off selection procedures as required by the Defense Federal Acquisition

Regulations (DFARS). The resulting FFP contract will be awarded in accordance with FAR Part

15 and applicable supplements, guidance, and instructions. All non-price technical evaluation

Factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. It is strongly suggested that the provisions stated in the RFP information be fully studied prior to assembly of the proposal.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1 ORDER OF PRECEDNECE

The evaluation factors listed below. The technical evaluation factors (Volume 1) are listed in descending order of precedence:

Volume I – Technical Factors

Performance Management Plan

Quality Assurance Program

Factor 1 –Technical Expertise – Technical Capability

Factor 2 – Mission Capability

Factor 3 – Past Performance

Factor 4 – Small Business Participation

Volume II – Cost/Price Information

Factor 5 – Cost/Price Evaluation

2.1.1 RELATIVE FACTOR WIGHTING

The Performance Management Plan and the Quality Assurance Program will be evaluated as a part of overall Technical Factor 1 Mission Capability.

Factor 1 is more important than Factor 2.

Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3.

Factor 3 is more important than Factor 4.

Factor 4 is more important than Factor 5; and

Factor 5 is the least important Factor

NOTE: ALL NON-PRICE TECHNICAL FACTORS (VOLUME I), WHEN COMBINED, ARE

SIGNIFICANTLY MORE IMPORTANT THAN PRICE (VOLUME II).

2.2 RATINGS

The technical rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance and capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal. This acquisition will use the combined technical/risk rating methodology that includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Any “Unacceptable” rating at the Technical Evaluation Factor level, or “Unreasonable” at the

Cost/Price Factor level, will make an Offeror’s proposal un-awardable.

Offerors are cautioned that contract award may not necessarily be made to the lowest priced proposal or the highest technically rated offer.

2.2.1 TECHNICAL RATINGS

The technical rating provides an assessment of the quality of the Offeror’s solution for meeting the Government’s requirement. Each Technical Factor (Factors 1-2) will receive one of the combined Technical/Risk adjectival ratings described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures and listed in the Table 1 below. The term “Technical refers to non-cost Factors other than Past

Performance that is used to assess the Offeror’s experience, capabilities, and proposed approach, as detailed in its proposal, to satisfy the Government’s requirement. Technical risk assesses the degree to which the Offeror’s proposed technical approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need to increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

The adjectival ratings utilized during proposal evaluation and each rating’s associated description with its level of risk is as follows:

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS FOR FACTORS 1 AND 2:

RATING DESCRIPTION

OUTSTANDING Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

GOOD Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

MARGINAL Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and thus contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is un-awardable.

2.2.2. PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

Past Performance considers ‘how well’ an Offeror performed and executed requirements on previous contracts, whereas Past Experience considers ‘what’ the Offeror performed and executed. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each

Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supply products and services that meet the contract’s requirements, resulting in a Relevancy Rating. A Performance

Confidence Rating is also assigned for each Offeror’s Past Performance after assessing and evaluating their past performance, focusing on performance that is recent and relevant to the contract requirements. As a result, an Offeror’s Past Performance rating will consist of two components: 1) a relevancy rating; and 2) a confidence rating. An assigned Past Performance

Factor rating will be comprised of one rating from Table 2 (relevancy) and one rating from Table

3 (confidence resulting in a Relevancy/Confidence rating (i.e., Relevant/Substantial Confidence, Somewhat Relevant/Limited Confidence, Etc.)

The Government will consider past performance information as submitted in accordance with

Section L of this solicitation and may also consider recent and relevant past performance information outside of the information provided by the Offeror and its customers. Therefore, the

Government reserves the right to use both the information provided by the Offeror as their Past

Performance for evaluation, as well as information that may be obtained from other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System

(FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), Contractor Performance

Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and commercial sources.

2.2.2.1 RELEVANCY ASSESSMENT

A relevancy determination of the Offeror’s past performance will be made based upon evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance information to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be performed under this contract. The relevancy of each Offeror’s submitted Past Performance projects will be rated based on the quality of each project’s narrative describing the work performed (i.e., how well the project’s scope is described) and how pertinent the work is to the Section C PWS, as well as the depth and breadth of each project’s scope (i.e., how many of the Section C PWS program areas are covered by the project’s scope). Criteria establishing what is recent and what aspects are considered relevant is stated in

Section L, Paragraph 3.5.1.

The Government will use the following relevancy definitions when assessing recent, relevant contract past performance per DoD Source Selection Procedures as reproduced in Table 2 below:

TABLE 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Rating Definition

VERY RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

SOMEWHAT RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

NOT RELEVANT Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

2.2.2.2 CONFIDENCE

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to…