B3_SF30_Amendment_0003_02-15-2017.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICAITON NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicble)

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

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a)By completing items 8 and 15, and returning 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 APPROPIRATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE 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.

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

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

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable m3adekaj

SECTION SF 30 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

Section B – Supplies and Services and Price –

BID SCHEDULE

AMENDMENT NO. 0003

(TO BE ATTACHED TO STANDARD FORM 1449)

Schedule No. 1 - Base Year Item No. Services Est

Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Estimated

Amount 0001AA Field Sampling - Marine 14 Each $ $

0001AB Field Sampling - Inland 98

Each $ $

0001AC Field Sampling – Geophysical Surveys, 1 Acre or Less

0002AA Laboratory Analysis – Marine incl bioassays

14 Each $ $

0002AB Laboratory Analysis – Inland

0002AC Laboratory Analysis – Dioxins

0002AD Laboratory Analysis- Grain Size

0002AE Laboratory Analysis- Benthics

5 Each $

0003AA Evaluation Report - Marine 2 Data Record

0003AB Evaluation Report – Inland 5 Data Record $ $

0003AC MPRSA Sect 103 Risk Modeling per sample-Marine

0003AD ODMDS Site Management Report – Marine

1 Data Record $ $

0004AA Section 404(b)1 Compliance Evaluation - Inland

1 Data Record

0004AB Dredge Material Evaluation for Beneficial Use - Inland

Total Estimated Base Year $

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 2

Option Year 1

Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Estimated

1001AA Field Sampling - Marine 7 Each $ $

1001AB Field Sampling - Inland 98

1001AC Field Sampling – Geophysical Surveys

1002AA Laboratory Analysis –

7 Each $ $

1002AB Laboratory Analysis –

1002AC Laboratory Analysis –

1002AD Laboratory Analysis-

1002AE Laboratory Analysis-

1003AA Evaluation Report - Marine 1 Data Record

1003AB Evaluation Report – Inland 5 Data Record $ $

1003AC MPRSA Sect 103 Risk

1003AD ODMDS Site Management

1004AA Section 404(b)1 Compliance

1004AB Dredge Material Evaluation

Total Estimated Option Year 1

A0003 - 3

Option Year 2

Unit Unit Price Total Estimated

2001AA Field Sampling - Marine 14 Each $ $

2001AB Field Sampling - Inland 98

2001AC Field Sampling –

2002AA Laboratory Analysis –

2002AB Laboratory Analysis –

2002AC Laboratory Analysis –

2002AD Laboratory Analysis-

2002AE Laboratory Analysis-

2003AA Evaluation Report - Marine 2 Data Record

2003AB Evaluation Report – Inland 5 Data Record $ $

2003AC MPRSA Sect 103 Risk

2003AD ODMDS Site Management

2004AA Section 404(b)1 Compliance

2004AB Dredge Material Evaluation

Year 2

A0003 - 4

Option Year 3

Item No. Services Estimated

Unit Unit Price Total Estimated

3001AA Field Sampling - Marine 7 Each $ $

3001AB Field Sampling - Inland 80

3001AC Field Sampling –

3002AA Laboratory Analysis –

3002AB Laboratory Analysis –

3002AC Laboratory Analysis –

3002AD Laboratory Analysis-

3002AE Laboratory Analysis-

3003AA Evaluation Report - Marine 1 Data Record

3003AB Evaluation Report – Inland 4 Data Record $ $

3003AC MPRSA Sect 103 Risk

3003AD ODMDS Site Management

3004AA Section 404(b)1 Compliance

3004AB Dredge Material Evaluation

Year 3

A0003 - 5

Option Year 4

Unit Unit Price Total Estimate

4001AA Field Sampling - Marine 14 Each $ $

4001AB Field Sampling - Inland 98

4001AC Field Sampling –

2 Each $ $

4002AA Laboratory Analysis –

4002AB Laboratory Analysis –

4002AC Laboratory Analysis –

4002AD Laboratory Analysis-

4002AE Laboratory Analysis-

4003AA Evaluation Report - Marine 1 Data Record

4003AB Evaluation Report – Inland 5 Data Record $ $

4003AC MPRSA Sect 103 Risk

4003AD ODMDS Site Management

4004AA Section 404(b)1 Compliance

4004AB Dredge Material Evaluation

Year 4

TOTAL ESTIMATED

BASE AND OPTIONS 1, 2,

3 and 4

End of Section B

A0003 - 6

W9126G-17-R-0031

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS PERTAINING TO HAND-CARRIED BIDS/OFFERS:

Hand-carried Bids/Offers must be delivered to: the Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer located at the US Army Corps of Engineers, Jadwin Building, 2000 Fort Point Road, Galveston District, Galveston, TX 77550. Not Later than the Due Date and Time. Bids/Offers will only be accepted by contracting personnel.

Guards are not authorized to accept Bids/Offers on behalf of the Government.

Galveston District has a security gate located on Fort Point Rd and requires all occupants of the vehicle to have a valid driver’s license for entry. Parking is limited. Firearms are not permitted on the installation.

Offerors are cautioned to allow sufficient time for travelling over the causeway or ferry. Neither will constitute Government caused delay.

Offerors are also cautioned that Galveston is an island that, during Spring Break and the Summer Season, can have traffic slow downs and congestion because the District is collocated with the Bolivar Ferry traffic waiting to board and can delay access to the District Office.

(End of Provision)

BIDDERS INQUIRY – PROJNET (RFP)

1. Prospective Offerors should submit questions concerning this Request for Proposal via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at www.projnet.org/projnet .

A. To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self register into the system. To self- register, go to the aforementioned 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 email 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.

***Please Note: Offerors shall only submit one question per inquiry. Inquiries containing multiple questions may be rejected.

B. From this page, you may view all bidder inquiries or add inquiry.

C. Offerors will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

D. The Solicitation Number is: W912HY-17-R-0031 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: WAAUZJ- XZMDS2

2. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquires five (5) (AMD 0003) calendar days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation if necessary.

3. Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety, review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

4. 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.

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

(End of Provision)

NOTE: Reference FAR 52.219-30, Notice of Set-Aside for, or Sole Source Award to, Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) Concerns Eligible Under the Women-Owned Small Business Program – Contracting Officers can accept a WOSB’s or EDWOSB’s self-certification, as long as the contracting officer verifies that the required documentation has been uploaded to the WOSB Repository which is available at https://certify.sba.gov , therefore, it is the responsibility of the offeror to assure the required documents have been uploaded to the WOSB Program Repository. No contract shall be awarded until all required documents are received in the repository.

SECTION L: INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, SUBMITTAL

A0003 - 7 https://certify.sba.gov/

REQUIREMENTS:

1. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND REQUIREMENTS. The proposal must be complete and contain the offeror’s most favorable terms as the Government intends to award a contract without discussions. Proposals are to be submitted in two separate volumes, Volume I – Technical Proposal and Volume 2 - Price Proposal. This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for General Environmental Services for dredged material evaluation as needed for the U.S. Army Engineer District, Galveston, Texas and Louisiana, all in accordance with the descriptions/Specifications/Work Statement (Section C), Contract Clauses (Section I), and subsequent task orders for a one (1) year period starting on the date of award with the options for four (4) additional one (1) year periods. This solicitation is issued utilizing the “Best Value Trade-Off” source selection process. Award of only one contract is anticipated to be awarded to a Woman Owned Small Business Concern. In as much as the proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform any resulting contract, the proposal should be specific and complete in every detail. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the contract. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent. Local instructions, including Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Provisions are annotated at the end of this section.

2. All pages in the – Technical Proposal, should be submitted in a standard three ring loose leaf binder and consist of single spaced typewritten pages using no less than 10 point font. A smaller type may be used on charts, graphs, figures, diagrams, and schematics to accommodate a “make it fit” software capability however, all text must be legible and easily read. Minimum margins shall be 0.75 inches. The page size of the offeror’s proposal shall not exceed 8-1/2 inches by 11 inches. When included, fold-out pages shall fold entirely within the volume and shall only be used for graphic representations. Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page. Page limitation is not to exceed 75 pages. The proposals should contain a detailed table of contents. If more than one binder is used, the complete table of contents shall be included in each. A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact), project description and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a Table of Contents. The page limitation does not include the Cover Page, Table of Contents, or the Past Performance Questionnaires. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government and the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. The government will not evaluate any information beyond the page limitation noted above. Number of Copies. Offerors shall submit original and (3) hard copies of Volume 1 and an original and one (1) hardcopy of Volume 2 of their Proposal in hard copy format.

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 8

3. In addition, provide one electronic copy on a CD that includes the complete proposal, Volumes 1 and 2. Failure to clearly label proposal information or any failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate table (Factor or Subfactor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluator cannot readily locate the appropriate information.

NOTE: Provide the complete Volumes 1 and 2 proposal submittal including text, photographs, etc. on a signal CD (one copy). If there is any conflicts or discrepancies between the paper copy and the electronic copy on the CD, the paper copy will control.

Each offeror is responsible for ensuring that the paper copy is consistent with the electronic copy of the proposal.

a. Each volume shall include:

(1) A Cover Page that identifies volume number, name, address, and telephone number of the offeror, and, if appropriate, name, address and phone numbers of subcontractors;

(2) A Table of Contents

b. Proposals shall be organized as required; and shall include cross referencing if necessary, as determined by the contractor. General cross references or cross referencing guides will not be considered as appropriate cross references, No material shall be incorporated by reference.

c. No proposal price data shall be included in Volume 1 – Technical Proposal.

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

REQUIREMENTS. FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL

CAPABILITY

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The offerors shall submit the following documentation for the following Factor 1 Subfactors,: Subfactor 1.1 Experience Subfactor 1.2 Key Personnel Qualifications Subfactor 1.3 Contract Management

SUBFACTOR 1.1 - TAB A: EXPERIENCE. The Government will evaluate the offerors Specialized Experience. (See Section C, Performance Work Statement).

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 9

Offerors shall submit at least three (3), but no more than five (5) completed or current contracts (with Federal, State or local governments or commercial industry) that represent the offeror’s experience as either the prime contractor or subcontractor that is relevant to the requirements of this of this Request for Proposal. The description of each project shall indicate the offeror’s role in the execution of that project. The experience shall be current or no more than five (5) years old. Each project description shall include information regarding the services involved and the length of the service and dollar value.

A “project” is defined as work performed at a single site under a single contract or task order. An Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract or similar ordering vehicle is not considered a “project”, however, a single task order issued under that IDIQ or ordering vehicle may be considered a “project” under this factor.

Offerors should use the following format when submitting project information under this Subfactor:

a. Project Title, Contract Number and Location

b. Total Dollar Amount

c. Start and Completion Dates

d. Role of Your Firm (As a prime contractor or as a subcontractor)

e. Description of the Project (Describe the project scope and address how this project relates to the work called for on this RFP)

f. Customer Point of Contact (Name, Relationship to Project, Agency/Firm

Affiliation, City, State, Current Phone Number and Email Address)

g. Awards, letters or other forms of recognition relevant to the submitted project that demonstrate the offeror's performance capabilities and customer satisfaction., if applicable

A maximum of five projects will be evaluated. If an offeror disregards these instructions and submits more than five (5) projects, only the first five projects will be evaluated.

Offerors should submit proposals that describe each project submission and how each project demonstrates the offeror’s ability to perform the work called for under this RFP.

This is demonstrated by completion of successful reports relevant to the environmental services described in Section C Performance Work Statement. (AMD 0003). Offerors should describe each project with enough detail to ensure that the Government can meaningfully assess how each project demonstrates the offeror’s experience with performing the work called for in this RFP.

As a demonstration of dredged material evaluation, the Offeror’s approach shall address knowledge of required dredged material testing as it relates to compliance with Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA) (Public Law 92-532), and in accordance with the U.S. EPA and USACE. 2003. Regional Implementation Agreement for Testing and Reporting Requirements for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material Off the Louisiana and Texas Under Section 103 of the Marine Program, Research and Sanctuaries Act (RIA). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston and New Orleans Districts. (AMD 0003)

A0003 - 10

SUBFACTOR 1.2 - TAB B: KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

The offeror shall identify qualification of key personnel by submission of a no more than a two page resume for each key position. Key personnel should include: Project Manager/Principal Investigator and other key staff members necessary to perform the services described in Section C. paragraph I.A. and I.B., i.e. Biologist(s), Toxicologist(s), GIS/CADD Technician(s), etc.

Include the following information on the resume:

a. Provide the academic background and relevant subject matter experience of the Project Managers/Principal Investigators and key staff members

b. Experience of key personnel with scientific techniques, analyses, research and technical writing

c. Regional experience – Gulf Coast- specifically State of Texas.

d. Knowledge of current environmental laws and government regulations.

SUBFACTOR 1.3 - TAB C: CONTRACT MANAGEMENT

The offerors shall submit the following documentation for a Management Plan.

Management Plan. Describe your firm’s proposed plan for performing the work described, in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). This shall be a well-defined and clear plan that addresses all requested elements of the contract. Process on how the offeror intends to check quality of work performed on the contract, and monitor progress. Describe what aspects of this contract that you intend to self-perform and provide a brief explanation for the aspects that will be subcontracted, if applicable, versus what will be self-performed and how this will ensure successful project execution.

Demonstrate in writing that the contractor understands the scope of the PWS and solicitation.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE (TAB D).

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Offerors are instructed to send Client Authorization Letters and Past Performance Questionnaires (provided in Section J) to a maximum of five (5) of the prime and/or subcontractor references submitted under Factor 1, Technical Capacity, to assist in the timely processing of the past performance evaluation of projects comparable in scope and value to potential orders under this contract. The letter will request that the reference complete and return the questionnaire to the Contracting Officer at the Galveston District.

The offeror should provide with the proposal Volume I, the Contractor Performance Assessment Report(s) (CPARS), if available, or partially completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) (Blocks 1-10) to the Contracting Division point of contact for each of the projects the offeror submits under Factor 1, Technical Capability.

Fully completed PPQs should be submitted directly to the Contracting Division point of contact, email maria.e.rodriguez@usace.army.mil Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittals of questionnaires.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with each offeror.

Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 11 mailto:maria.e.rodriguez@usace.army.mil

Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment reporting System (CPARS) Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or other databases, interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror's performance, and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror's performance capability.

The completed Past Performance Questionnaires are excluded from the page limitation. The completed questionnaires may be received by the contracting office prior to closing, but not later than the closing date and time. It is the Contractor's responsibility to ensure that the reference documentation is provided, as the Government may not make additional requests for past performance information from the references. Do not request past performance questionnaires on projects that have completed final CPARS evaluations.

Applicable to past performance. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror will receive a neutral rating. Offerors who receive a neutral rating will not be evaluated either favorably, or unfavorably; but will be evaluated in the context of the importance of past performance to the overall task effort.

FACTOR 3: PRICE (VOLUME II). Submit the signed SF1449 and acknowledge any Amendments, if issued. Complete and submit the Bid Schedule provided in the solicitation or as updated by a formal amendment. In accordance with FAR 52.215-1, the first page of the proposal must show –

(i) The solicitation number;

(ii) The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror (and electronic address if available);

(iii) A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

(iv) Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation; and

(v) Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

Proposal shall be addressed to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston District Attn: Contracting Division (Maria Rodriguez) 2000 Fort Point Road Galveston, TX 77550

1. Proposal Submissions and the Best Value Trade-Off Process. This process permits

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 12 tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. Offerors submit their performance and capability information for review and consideration by the Government. The SSEB reviews, evaluates, and rates the proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP.

Concurrently, the Government analyzes price proposals of Offerors. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the final best value determination for award. The Source Selection Authority compares proposals to one another and determines the best value for the government. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal shall merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

a. Who May Submit? Woman Owned Small Business firms

b. Where to submit. Offers shall submit their proposals to the Galveston District at the address shown in block 9 of the Standard Form 1449.

c. Submission Deadline. Proposals shall be received by the

Galveston District no later than the time and date specified in Block 8 of the Standard Form 1449.

d. With the submission of an offer, the Offeror hereby agrees to perform the work at the prices specified in strict accordance with the terms and conditions of the RFP/Solicitation and any resulting Task Order, if the offer is accepted in writing within 60 calendar days after the offers are due.

3. New Companies and Joint Ventures. If offeror represents the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of RFP, the proposal shall clearly identify the contractual responsibilities of each firm and the work to be performed by each; describe the nature of the association; indicate whether the firms have experience working together in service ventures, including how long and how many projects. In addition, each company including joint ventures shall list their Government contract experience. Provide a copy of the commitment letter of the firms or the joint venture agreement. Prior to award of any contract, a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement will be required. If approval of the Joint Venture Agreement is required by the Small Business Administration, failure to timely provide an approved SBA Joint Venture Agreement may prevent award of a contract.

End of Section L

A0003 - 13

4.1 Evaluation Factors for Award

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR DREDGED MATERIAL

EVALUATION SERVICES FOR U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS GALVESTON

DISTRICT BASIS OF AWARD: BEST VALUE, TECHNICAL TRADE-OFF

1. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforms to the solicitation ARE FAIR AND REASONABLE, AND OFFERS THE OVERALL BEST VALUE TO THE Government.

The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest price offer. The right is also reserved to reject all offers.

2. This solicitation is issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP) in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (and its supplements Part 15 Contracting by Negotiation.

The NAICS is 541620-Environmental Consulting Services, and the Size Standard is $15.0 million. This acquisition is 100% Set Aside for Woman Owned Small Businesses.

a. PROPOSAL OVERVIEW. This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits the Firm

Fixed Price (FFP) contract for General Environmental Services for dredged material evaluation as needed for the U.S. Army Engineer District, Galveston, Texas and Louisiana. The purpose of the Source Selection plan is to establish a uniform evaluation procedure for the technical evaluation of proposals by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and the development of the Best Value Decision by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) using the Trade-Off Process (See Federal Acquisition Regulation 15.101-1). In as much as the proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform any resulting contract, the proposal should be specific and complete in every detail. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the contract. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent. Local Instructions, including Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Provisions are annotated at the end of this section.

b. PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE TRADE-OFF PROCESS. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. Offerors submit their performance and capability information for review and consideration by the Government.

The SSEB reviews, evaluates, and rates the proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP. Concurrently, the Government analyzes, price proposals of Offerors. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the final best value determination for award. The SSA compares proposals to one another and determines the best value for the government. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal shall merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented.

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 14

c. EVALUATION FACTORS DESCRIBED IN

DETAIL FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Evaluation Criteria The Offeror’s experience will be evaluated based on the Government’s assessment of each submitted project’s similarity (in terms of size and scope) to the work described in this RFP, including the evaluation of the following Subfactors. An overall rating will be assigned to Factor 1. The relative importance of each Subfactor to each other is listed below.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION WEIGHTS – (TECHNICAL FACTORS)

FACTOR 1. TECHNICAL CAPABILITY - Demonstration of Technical Capability (i.e. full range of experience to perform typical tasks.)

SUB-FACTORS RELATIVE

SUB-FACTOR 1.1 Experience, TAB A.

Contractor Profiles and Background/Specialized Experience - Evaluation of the documentation that demonstrates the contractor’s technical capability based on performance on up to 5 similar/previous contracts, qualifications & experience (Section C). The Government will determine whether the Offeror’s experience including the planning and implementation, on contracts similar in size, scope, and complexity to the Galveston District’s Dredged Material Evaluation Program.

Greater consideration will be given for regional experience and familiarity with the application of rules and regulations related to preparing sediment evaluations in Texas and the Gulf Coast. Evaluation will include successful completion of reports relevant to the environmental services described in Section C with an emphasis on Section 103 of the MPRSA.

(AMD 0003)

Sub-Factor 1.1 is Significantly more important than Sub- Factor 1.2. and Subfactor 1.3.

SUB-FACTOR 1.2, Key Personnel Qualifications, TAB B.

Evaluation of the proposed Key Personnel resumes and qualifications of the proposed personnel to successfully perform the work required by the Performance Work Statement (Section C, para I.A. and I.B.)

Sub-Factors 1.2 and 1.3 are equal in importance to each other.

SUB-FACTOR 1.3, Contract Management, TAB C.

The Government intends to evaluate how well the Offeror’s Management Plan demonstrates its understanding of the RFP requirements and the offeror’s overall approach to successfully manage the General Environmental Services for dredged material evaluation required by this contract.

Demonstrates a clear understanding of the work and an effective plan to coordinate all labor, resources, subcontractors and material suppliers to ensure successful completion of the work required by this RFP.

Clearly and effectively explains how the offeror will successfully monitor and perform quality control on the contract.

A0003 - 15

Rating Method

Combined Technical Capability/Risk Rating Method. The combined technical capability/risk rating for Factor 1 and its Sub-factors, includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the table below:

Technical Assessment Ratings Adjectival Rating Definition Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 16

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE (TAB D):

Evaluation Criteria The Government will first evaluate the relevancy of each offeror’s project submission identified in the offeror’s proposal to the work called for in this RFP. Proposals that demonstrate successful past performance of projects similar in size and scope will be considered when the Government is assessing the relevance of each project.

After determining the relevance of each submitted project, the Government will assess the contractor’s performance on its submitted projects and will then assign each offeror a confidence rating based on the offeror’s relevant performance record and the Government’s expectation that the offeror will successfully perform all contract requirements.

The Government reserves the right to check any and all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. The Government also reserves the right to not contact the provided references. The Government may also use other tools such as CPARS, FAPPIS, Dun & Bradstreet, etc. or any other relevant information that might assist the Government in evaluating each offeror’s relevant past performance history.

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 as subcontractors on submitted projects due to the Government’s or other owner’s lack of privity with subcontractors.

Rating Method - For Factor 2, Past Performance, the Government will assess the relevance of each submitted project before applying an overall Performance Confidence Rating using the follow definitions:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires.

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

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires.

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 17

Past Performance Confidence Assessment Rating Definition Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

FACTOR 4: PRICE

Price be will evaluated, however, no adjectival ratings shall be utilized for evaluating cost or price. Price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of price and/or cost analysis of the proposed total evaluated price including options. Price will also be evaluated as part of the best value trade-off evaluation process.

Prices will not be revealed to the technical evaluation team until after they have completed their evaluation of the past performance submissions. NOTE: As the assessed risk ratings among the Offerors become less distinct, price becomes more important.

3. BASIS FOR AWARD

RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS. The Government shall make a best value determination utilizing Factor 1, Technical Capability; Factor 2, Past Performance; and Factor 3, Cost or Price. Factor 1, Technical Capability is significantly more important than Factor 2, Past Performance. All the technical non-price factors when combined are significantly more important than Factor 3, Cost or Price; therefore, a best value decision will be made using Best Value Tradeoff (BVT) procedures.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral) No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 18

NOTE: The degree of importance of price could become greater depending upon the equality of the technical proposals. If competing technical proposals are determined to be essentially equal, price could become the controlling factor.

a. The Government shall award a contract on an all or none basis to a contractor that is found responsive in accordance with FAR 9.104, and offers the best value to the Government.

b. Offerors shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR Part 15. The

Government intends to award without discussions however, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

c. In an effort to ensure efficiency in the evaluation process, the Government may choose to establish a competitive range, which shall include only those firms found to be the most highly rated proposals. The contracting officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals (10 U.S.C. 2305(b)(4) and 41 U.S.C. 253b(d)). In accordance with FAR 15.306(c) those proposals which have been properly submitted, will be evaluated to determine a competitive range. Once the competitive range is established, an award may be made to the offeror whose proposal receives the highest evaluation and whose price, after a subjective evaluation by the board, is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. In the event that clarifications, communications, or negotiations are needed, those falling within the competitive range will be contacted.

Following the receipt of the best and final offers, each received offer will be evaluated and award will be made to the offeror who represents the best value to the Government. Please note than an award may be made from the original proposal without further negotiations, therefore, the offeror should submit the best offer possible with their original proposal.

The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer, as the award decision shall be made utilizing the best value continuum as described in FAR 15.

d. The Government reserves the right to reject all offers. Evaluation of offers shall be conducted in a fair and unbiased manner. The Government reserves the right to reject all offers.

The Government shall not award a contract at an unfair and unreasonable price.

e. Possible Exchanges During the Selection Process –

(1) Clarifications - A Clarification is defined as limited exchanges, between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. If award is to be made without discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of proposals, including an offeror’s past performance, or to resolve minor or clerical errors. When clarifications are needed, communication with an offeror will be handled through the Contracting Officer. Clarifications do not provide the offeror an opportunity to revise or modify its proposal, except for correction of apparent clerical mistakes that would ultimately result in a revision.

Solicitation No. W9126G-17-R-0031

A0003 - 19

(2) Communications - Communications may take place with offerors before the establishment of a competitive range. Communications are exchanges, between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range. Communications shall be limited to the offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor, preventing them from being placed within the competitive range. Such communications, if required, shall address adverse past performance information to which an offeror has not had a prior opportunity to respond and may only be held with those offerors whose exclusion from, or inclusion in, the competitive range is uncertain. Communications may also be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals; allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the Government’s evaluation process.

Such communications shall not be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or cost elements of the proposal. Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range.

Communications shall not provide an opportunity for the offeror to revise its proposal, but may address ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns such as perceived deficiencies, weaknesses, errors, omissions, or mistakes, and information relating to relevant past performance.

(3) Discussions – Exchanges with offerors, between the Government and offerors that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. These exchanges with offerors take place after the establishment of the competitive range and are called discussions. The objective of discussions is to maximize the Government’s ability to obtain best value, based on the requirement and the evaluation factors set forth in the solicitation.

f. Definitions -

- Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

- Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

- Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

- Weakness means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

End of Section M

A0003 - 20

2000 FORT POINT ROAD

P.O. BOX 1229

GALVESTON, TEXAS 77553-1229

2000 FORT POINT ROAD

P.O. BOX 1229

GALVESTON, TEXAS 77553-1229

1) Incorporate a revised Bid Schedule (see continuation pages)

2) Amend Sections L and M (see continuation pages)

3) Amend Section C.,III BID ITEM DEFINITIONS., Evaluation Report- Marine (per project) to:

"All tasks associated with the production and analysis to complete the preliminary and final reports for contaminant analysis for Section 103 of MPRSA to include coordination, paper and electronic deliverables to include preparation of SAP/QAPP document."