09r0011-0002.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

INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE QUANTITY SERVICES CONTRACT FOR MUNITIONS & EXPLOSIVES OF CONCERN (MEC) RESPONSE ACTIONS, FORMER WAIKOLOA MANEUVER AREA (WMA) AND HONOLULU DISTRICT (POH) AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY (AOR), U.S. ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS, HONOLULU DISTRICT

a. This amendment #0002 includes the follow ing changes; 1) revises "Questions / Responses" Section; 2) revises the First Task Order Scope of Work; 3) revises First Task Order Scope of Work Map; 4) revises the "Proposal Submittal Instructions" section; and 5) revises the "Evaluation Factors for Aw ard" section.

(See continued pages for a summary of changes)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 28

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Mar-2009

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 W9128A-09-R-0011

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

17-Feb-2009

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

05-Mar-2009

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

USAED, HONOLULU

BLDG S230

FT. SHAFTER HI 96858-5440

W9128A 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9128A-09-R-0011

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

b. The following section have been modified as follows:

EVALUATION FACTORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE EVALUATION PROCESS FOR AWARD

Proposals shall be evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked, using the non-cost/price (technical) factors listed below in section A. There shall be no trade offs. Past performance shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305; however, there shall be no comparative assessment of Offerors’ past performance.

A. Evaluation Factors

The award decision will be made after the Government’s evaluation of the following factors:

Factor 1: Previous Experience

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Key Personnel

Factor 4: Price

B. Basis of Award

The Government will make award to the responsible offeror submitting the lowest-priced technically acceptable proposal. The basis of award is the low price for the first task order requirement. The Government intends to make award without entering discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

Any proposal which does not meet the minimum requirement of acceptability (or neutral for past performance) for any one or more of the Technical (non-priced) Factors will be considered unacceptable and will not be eligible for award.

C. Definitions

The evaluator shall select one of the adjectival ratings below for the non-price factors that most clearly matches the assessment of the proposal's merit based on the established evaluation criteria. All offers shall be assigned one of the below adjective ratings.

ACCEPTABLE (A): The proposal meets the stated requirements. The response is considered complete in terms of the basic content and level of information the Government seeks for evaluation. There is good probability of success and little risk that this offeror would fail to meet the quantity, quality, and schedule requirements.

NEUTRAL (N): The offeror has no record of relevant past performance. This rating applies to Past Performance only.

UNACCEPTABLE (U): The proposal fails to meet the stated requirements. What was submitted lacks essential information or is conflicting and unproductive.

RELEVANT PROJECT: A remediation and disposal of Munitions & Explosives of Concern (MEC) contract or task order including ALL of the following requirements: 1) Offeror performing or performed as the prime contractor 2) currently active or completed within the last five (5) years from proposal due date: 3) Contract amount of at least $3,000,000.00; 4) at least 50% of labor effort was or is being performed by the offeror; 4) the offeror demonstrated the ability to treat, demilitarize, and dispose of Material Potentially Presenting an Explosive Hazard (MPPEH) in accordance with applicable local, state and federal rules and regulations; and 5) the offeror demonstrated the ability to deal with unique archaeological and cultural resources at project sites, D. Specific Evaluation Criteria

FACTOR 1: PREVIOUS EXPERIENCES

Basis of Evaluation for Factor 1, Previous Experiences:

Acceptable: The offeror submitted as required, at least one relevant project.

Unacceptable: The offeror did not submit as required, one relevant project.

Proposal Submission Requirements for Factor 1, Previous Experiences

Offerors shall identify one but not more than three (3) relevant project(s) as defined above. For each relevant project, the offeror shall provide a short description of the project’s scope and contract amount; a discussion on the archaeological issues and /or concerns at the project sites, and subsequent dealings with state and local agencies; and description of the process used to treat, demilitarize, and dispose of MPPEH. The offeror shall limit the discussion of each presented relevant project to not more than two (2), 8 ½ x 11, pages per relevant project. The font size used shall not be smaller than 11.

The offeror’s adherence to prescribed page and formatting limitations will be strictly enforced by the evaluators.

Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will NOT be evaluated. For example, information on the third page of a relevant project will not be evaluated, which may cause the offeror’s Factor 1 proposal to be rejected as unacceptable.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

Basis of Evaluation for Factor 2, Past Performance

Offeror received at least a “Satisfactory” overall rating for all relevant project(s) submitted. The Government’s past performance evaluation process will involve contacting the offerors’ provided customers and requesting information from references and other customers to validate and/or supplement information provided as part of the evaluation. The Government shall consider information obtained from any other sources when evaluating the offeror’s past performance.

Offerors may provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror corrective actions. The source selection authority shall determine the relevance of similar past performance information.

Offeror’s which do not show relevant past performance, or where no known past performance is found, will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on this Factor. The rating provided in this determination will be “Neutral.”

Proposal Submission Requirements for Factor 2, Past Performance:

Offerors shall provide a point of contact and an alternate point of contact as a reference for all the relevant projects listed in Factor 1, Previous Experience that will be able to answer questions in areas such as overall performance; safety record and degree of commitment to safety; compliance with local, regional and national environmental regulations; timeliness, adherence to schedule, and schedule compliance; and overall customer satisfaction.

IMPORTANT: It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide both accurate points of contact and alternate points of contact for each identified project, and current telephone numbers and email adresses. Failure of references to be able to respond to past performance inquiries may preclude the evaluator’s ability to assign a past performance rating.

For the presented contract, if problems were encountered during the project, the offeror may provide an explanation of problems encountered and the corrective action taken, if any.

FACTOR 3: Key Personnel

Basis of Evaluation for Factor 3, Key Personnel:

Evaluators will evaluate key MEC response actions personnel directly responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operations of this contract. The evaluators will base their determinations on the description of experience and qualification of personnel provided on respective key personnel resumes. Failure to meet minimum qualifications for any one Key Personnel will result in an unacceptable rating

The following positions are considered Key Personnel: Principal Investigator/Program Manager, Site Operations Manager/Project Manager, Site QA/QC Manager, and Senior Unexploded Ordnance, Supervisors (SUXOS), UXO Safety Officer (UXOSO), and GIS Manager.

1. Principal Investigator/Program Manager.

Minimum one (1), must be employee of prime contractor.

Responsibilities and duties include: (1) overall management of this contract; (2) ensuring compliance with all applicable Federal, State, Local, DoD especially Army/Army Corps of Engineers, and DDESB regulations, guidance, and policy, as well as the contract terms and conditions; (3) monitoring and controlling project costs and quality control; (4) assigning personnel consistent with contract requirements.

Minimum qualifications include the following: masters and/or bachelors degree in engineering or physical science; at least ten (10) years of experience managing large contracts and/or concurrent projects at multiple locations, five (5) years of which as a senior manager working on environmental assessment, remediation, and other related activities associated with environmental activities.

2. Field Operations Manager/Senior Project Manager Minimum one (1), must be employee of prime contractor.

Responsibilities include directing day-to-day operations in the field, assembling clearance teams and directing work associated with range clearance and ordnance remediation procedures, environmental, and compliance projects. Ensuring that elements of project plans can be implemented within schedule and within budget, recommending and justifying change orders, developing or modifying a method for tracking resources, coordinating work accomplished by subcontractors, monitoring and controlling costs, and complying with normal safety procedures, as well as regulatory requirements.

Minimum qualifications include the following: graduate of the U.S Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD), Indian Head, MD, and/or U.S. Army Bomb Disposal School, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD or equivalent; a minimum of fifteen years (15) in EOD/UXO experiences with a minimum of five (5) years of which as field operations manager working on, clearance and disposal of MEC

3. Quality Control (QC) Manager Minimum one (1), must be employee of prime contractor.

Responsibilities include developing the QC program for the contract and tailoring to fit the requirements of each

TO.

Minimum qualifications include the following: graduate of the U.S Naval EOD, Indian Head, MD, and/or U.S.

Army Bomb Disposal School, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD or equivalent; certification by American Society for Quality as a Certified Quality Auditor (CQA), or Certified Quality Manager (CQMgr), or Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence (CMQ/OE), or Six Sigma Green or Black Belt; or Documented training in auditing of Quality Systems such as ISO9000; minimum five (5) years experience as a QC Manager in environmental quality control procedures for MEC clearance and disposal, or a minimum of eight (8) years of MEC experience with a certification by American Society for Quality as a Certified Quality Auditor (CQA), or Certified Quality Manager (CQMgr), or Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence (CMQ/OE).

4. UXO Quality Control Specialist Minimum one (1), must be employee of prime contractor

Responsibilities include developing, maintaining, and enforcing the QC program during field activities.

Minimum qualifications include the following: graduate of the U.S Naval EOD, Indian Head, MD, and/or U.S.

Army Bomb Disposal School, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD or equivalent; certification or in training to obtain certification by American Society for Quality as a Certified Quality Auditor (CQA), or Certified Quality Manager (CQMgr), or Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence (CMQ/OE); eight (8) years experience in UXO field;

knowledge of munitions and explosive safety QC requirements and documented experience in projects similar to the task orders expected for this IDIQ contract; experienced in evaluation of the functions required of UXO Technicians I, II, III and SUXOS., or Six Sigma Green or Black Belt; or Documented training in auditing of Quality Systems such as ISO9000;eight (8) years experience in UXO field; five (5) years experience or training to develop, implement and monitor the Quality System for the Contract; knowledge of munitions and explosive safety QC requirements and documented experience in projects similar to the task orders expected for the Contract; experienced in evaluation of the functions required of UXO Technicians I, II, III, and SUXOS;

5. Senior Unexploded Ordnance Supervisors (SUXOS) Minimum (2) two, at least one (1) must be employee of prime contractor.

Responsibilities include supervising all UXO related site work. Duties include scheduling and coordinating UXO operations, routine performance inspections, and submitting reports and schedules to the field project manager.

Minimum qualifications include the following: graduate of the U.S Naval EOD, Indian Head, MD, and/or U.S.

Army Bomb Disposal School, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD or equivalent; 10 years of UXO experience of which five (5) years would be in the supervision of personnel working with unexploded ordnance; experienced in handling multi-team tasking for UXO remediation or range clearance operations; must be able to fully perform all of the functions enumerated for UXO Sweep Personnel and UXO Technicians I, II, and III. In addition, the SUXOS has the ability to perform the following functions is a requirement for the SUXOS: planning, coordinating, and supervising all contractor on-site OE activities; preparing standing operating procedures (SOPs) for MEC operations, ensuring compliance with DOD directives as well as local, state, and Federal statutes and codes; and certification of Ammunition, Explosives, and Dangerous Articles (AEDA) and/or range scrap as ready for turn-in or disposal in accordance with current policies. The SUXOS must also be fully capable of supervising multiple project teams which may be performing OE and OE-related activities: e.g., vegetation removal; land surveying; reconnaissance and classification of MEC, pyrotechnic items, and military explosives and demolition materials; locating surface and subsurface MEC; destroying UXO and MEC by burning or detonation; and/or transporting and storing MEC and demolition material.

6. Safety Manager/Certified Industrial Hygienist It is not necessary for the qualified individual for this position to be an employee of the prime contractor.

Responsibilities include implementing and overseeing the Contractor's corporate health and safety program and plans.

Minimum qualifications include the following: undergraduate degree in physical science, life science or engineering from an accredited college or university; five (5) years professional experience as a full-time industrial hygienist; documented experience in air monitoring technologies and in the development of personal protective equipment programs for working in potentially hazardous atmospheres; knowledge of applicable federal, state and local, and DoD, Army/Army Corps of Engineers occupational health and safety regulations and munitions; and certified by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene.

7. UXO Safety Officer (UXOSO) Minimum one (1), must be employee prime contractor.

Responsibilities include ensuring that elements of the approved site health and safety plan are implemented and enforced on-site.

Minimum qualifications include the following: graduate of the U.S Naval EOD, Indian Head, MD, and/or U.S.

Army Bomb Disposal School, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD or equivalent; eight (8) years working experience at MEC clearance and/or processing/recycling of range residue and munitions response sites where UXO was present (must be qualified UXO Tech III); must have experience in all phases of munitions response actions or range clearance activities, as appropriate for the contracted operation, and applicable safety standards; specialized training in UXO/explosive safety and personal and respiratory protective equipment, program implementation, proper use of demilitarization techniques, air monitoring instruments, air sampling methods, and interpretation of results; certified in first aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by a recognized organization such as the American Red Cross;

8. GIS Manager Minimum one (1), must be employee of prime contractor.

Responsibilities include maintaining the spatial data that have been generated and assembled into a GIS to assist in the planning and performance of MEC removal actions at the Honolulu District (POH) Area of Responsibility (AOR); and directing the input data to the existing system as they become available. The existing system consists of base data layers for the property area, the property boundaries, detailed road and water networks, and ordnance removal locations.

Minimum qualifications include minimum 3 years of direct experience managing computerized GIS using ESRI (i.e., ArcGIS, Oracle database, etc.)within a Microstation GIS environment.

Proposal Submission Requirements for Factor 3, Key Personnel:

All information is to be submitted on resumes. The Offeror shall submit academic qualifications and experience of key personnel staff possessing their respective qualification requirements. Each resume shall not exceed three pages and shall not include a font size of less than 11. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will NOT be evaluated. For example, information on the fourth page of a resume will not be evaluated, which may cause the offeror’s Factor 3 proposal to be rejected as unacceptable.

A signed letter of intent from each of the proposed key personnel, stating that he or she intends to work on this contract if the offeror receives the award shall be submitted with their respective resumes. The Government will not evaluate submissions if a letter of intent is not included in the proposal, which will result in an unacceptable rating for this factor.

FACTOR 4: PRICE

Basis of Evaluation for Factor 4, Price:

. The basis of award is provided in paragraph B (Basis of Award) above. Price analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

- comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation

- comparison of proposed prices with available historical information

- comparison of proposed prices with the Government Cost Estimate

Price will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness. Unrealistically low proposed prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from the competition either on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or the offeror has made an unrealistic proposal subject to the requirements of FAR 15.305 and

FAR 15.306.

Proposed hourly discipline and overhead rates for the IDIQ contract will be evaluated to determine that the price is fair and reasonable, and free of clerical or mathematical error.

Price proposals for the first task order will be evaluated to determine fair and reasonableness. It is also analyzed to determine whether it is realistic for the work to be performed; reflects a clear understanding of the requirements; and is consistent with the Offeror’s technical proposal. Responses that the offeror understands, or will comply with the specifications, paraphrasing the specifications; and general or overly broad responses such as ‘standard procedures will be employed’ or ‘well known techniques will be used” etc,. will be rated unacceptable.

The Contracting Officer will evaluate the price proposals for unbalanced pricing. The Contracting Officer will reject an offer if he/she determines that the lack of price balancing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed IDIQ price rates to determine fair and reasonableness.

The Government will then evaluate the proposed task order price to determine fair and reasonableness, which will determine the lowest price.

Proposal Submission Requirements for Factor 4

Offeror’s shall submit their proposed IDIQ price rates by completing the “Pricing Schedule” section provided in the Request for Proposal. Offeror shall include a breakdown of proposed overhead rates.

Offerors shall also submit a lump sum cost for the first task order including its cost breakdown and supporting price proposals from the Offeror’s Subcontractors, as warranted.

--- END EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD SECTION ---

c. The FIRST TASK ORDER MAP is revised as follows:

d. The FIRST TASK ORDER SCOPE OF WORK is revised as follows:

Scope of Work for

MUNITIONS & EXPLOSIVES OF CONCERN (MEC) REMOVAL ACTION

& SUPPORTING FUNCTIONS

FORMER WAIKOLOA MANEUVER AREA

WAIMEA, BIG ISLAND, HAWAII

17 February 2009

Revised 4 March 2009

1. Project Objective

2. General Project Requirements

3. Background and History

4. Description of Services Task 1- Project Management and Coordination with POH Task 2- Preparation of Plans and Relating Documents Task 3- Base Mapping and GIS Task 4- Perform MEC Removal at Area MSector 15 Task 5- Perform Archaeological Monitoring Task 6- Geophysical Prove Out Task 7- Field Office and Personnel Task 8- Prepare and Submit Removal Report

5. Period of Contract and Schedule

6. Submittals

7. Applicable Regulations

8. Government Furnished

9. Payment

10. Contractor’s Release

11. Release of Information

12. Performance Matrix

1. PROJECT OBJECTIVE

The objective of this Scope of Work (SOW) is to perform a removal action (RA) to remove and dispose of MEC and munitions debris (MD) found at selected project site, namely Sector 15 (approximately 450 acres) at the former Waikoloa Maneuver Area.

MEC include unexploded ordnance (UXO), discarded military munitions (DMM), and munitions constituents (MC) that are present in sufficient concentration to constitute an explosive hazard.

Detailed description of the project sites under this contract is included in Task 4 of this SOW. All data gathered shall be used to update and maintain the GIS System for all of the former Waikoloa Maneuver Area (WMA).

2. GENERAL PROJECT REQUIREMENTS.

The work required under this SOW falls under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program for Formerly Used Defense Sites (DERP-FUDS). MEC exist as a result of previous Department of Defense activities.

2.1 This contract constitutes a performance-based firm fixed price contract type. The performance and subsequently the government’s evaluation of the Contractor shall be based on certain performance metrics to be discussed in section 13 and throughout pertinent portions of this SOW.

2.2 MEC is a safety hazard and may constitute an imminent and substantial endangerment to the local populace and site personnel. The SOW under this contract is classified as Non Time-Critical Removal Action (NTCRA), and shall be performed in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Section 104, and the National Contingency Plan (NCP), Sections 300.120(d) and 300.400(e).

2.3 All activities involving work in areas potentially containing MEC hazards shall be conducted in full compliance with Department of Defense (DoD), Department of Army (DA), US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), state and local requirements regarding personnel, equipment, and procedures. 29 CFR 1910.120 shall apply to all actions taken at this project site.

2.4 Due to the inherent risks associated with munitions response activities, night time (dusk to dawn) work is not allowed; and personnel performing UXO activities that present an explosive risk shall be limited to a 40-hour work week, with no individual workday exceeding 10-hours total, unless specifically authorized by the Contracting Officer (KO) and/or Contractor Officer’s Representative (COR).

2.5 Chemical Warfare Materiel (CWM). Based on archival records, no evidence of the potential existence of CWM or CWM byproducts at the Former Waikoloa Maneuver Area was discovered. However, if the Contractor identifies or suspects unknown liquid filled munitions during any phase of field activities, the Contractor shall immediately withdraw upwind from the work area and contact the responsible COR and the appropriate POH’s field representative identified in the Project Work Plan (PWP)/Accident Prevention Plan (APP). The contractor shall secure the area and provide a minimum two personnel located upwind of the suspect CWM to prevent unauthorized access until relieved by the DA emergency response personnel, e.g. construction of blast mitigation controls. Additional reporting instructions are contained in EP 75-1-3 Explosives-Chemical Warfare Materiel Response (http://www.usace.army.mil/publications/eng-pamphlets/ep75-1-3/toc.htm) and CEMP-CE Memorandum Notification Procedures for Discovery of Recovered Chemical Warfare Materiel (RCWM) during USACE Projects.

http://www.hnd.usace.army.mil/oew/policy/IntGuidRegs/RCWM%20Notification%20memo_w_encl23%2 0April%2004.pdf

2.6 Permits. The contractor shall obtain the permits and licenses necessary to conduct his operations including building permits, air permit, licenses to purchase explosives, blaster’s licenses, and Department of Transportation (DOT) permits for transport of OE and HTRW on public highways. All permit acquisition and requirements will be coordinated with the Government personnel, unless specifically necessary for the operations of the contractor.

3. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

3.1 Site History. The Waikoloa area is situated on the Big Island of Hawaii, encompassing approximately 130,000 acres. In December 1943, the U. S. Navy through a licensing agreement with Parker Ranch acquired 91,000 acres in Waikoloa. Part of it was used as an artillery firing range on which live ammunition and other explosives were employed, with the remaining acreage utilized for troop maneuvers, and encampment. Department of Defense activities ended in 1946, and the area of land known as the Waikoloa Maneuver Area (WMA) was returned to Parker Ranch. In the mid-to-late 1960’s, Parker Ranch subsequently sold off two parcels (Puako and Ouli) to the present owners, Nansay Hawaii, Inc., which purchased fee simple title to the properties in April 1990. Nansay Hawaii, Inc. plans to construct golf communities thereon. Construction of a residential subdivision at the Ouli parcel of the Nansay Hawaii site is currently ongoing while the Puako parcel remains vacant and undeveloped.

3.2 History of MEC at the site. There were at least two ordnance clearance efforts conducted at the WMA before determination of WMA as DERP-FUDS eligible: one in 1946 prior to the departure of the 5th Marine Division, and the other in 1954 following accidental detonation of a dud fuse or shell killing two civilians and seriously injuring three others. The 1954 effort detected as many as 400 dud items including hand grenades, 60 and 81 mm mortars, 75 mm shells, and 105 and 155 mm shell fuses, 31 mm anti-tank cannon shells, and 4.2 inch mortars. MEC continued to be discovered at the former WMA as development progresses.

3.3 Previous studies and MEC clearance.

In the years 1991-1992, WMA was determined to be DERP-FUDS eligible by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). An engineering evaluation/cost analysis (EE/CA) conducted in 3 phases- beginning with the Phase I EE/CA in 1997, Phase II in 2001, and Phase III completed in 2006- identified approximately 51,000 acres within WMA as ordnance sites to be included for removal action under DERP-

FUDS.

In 2002, the USACE initiated ordnance removal at WMA, and up to this date, approximately 8,000 acres have undergone clearance.

In June 2008, the USACE-Honolulu District (POH) awarded a contract to a Native Hawaiian Organization (NHO) Joint Venture to continue the MEC removal action at WMA. The fieldwork is scheduled to be completed by mid-July 2009, and the contract by October 2009.

4. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

4.1 Task 1-Project Management and Coordination with POH

4.1.1. The Contractor shall assign a Program Manager (PM) and an on-site Project Manager (OPM) from its staff to regularly coordinate the progress of the Contractor's contractual and field activities with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Honolulu Engineer District (POH). The PM and OPM shall be proposed by the Contractor and approved by POH before the start of fieldwork.

POH’s points of contact for this project includes, but not limited to, the following:

Contracting Officer (KO): Ms. Maria Buckner 808-438-8583 Maria.R.Buckner@usace.army.mil

Project Manager (PM): Mr. Gary Shirakata 808-438-0772 Gary.N.Shirakata@usace.army.mil

Technical Lead (TL)/Contracting Officer Representative (COR): Ms. Uyen Tran 808-438-0512 Uyen.Tran@usace.army.mil

OE Safety Specialist: Mr. Mike Mullen 808-438-0468 Michael.K.Mullen@usace.army.mil

OE Safety Specialist: Mr. Harmon Slappy 808-769-7392 Harmon.L.Slappy@usace.army.mil

In addition, the Contractor shall coordinate with other individual(s) from POH as specified by the PM/TL after contract award.

4.1.2. Meetings and Briefings.

4.1.2.1. Kick off meeting. The Contractor shall organize and propose agenda for the project kick-off meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the specific role and responsibilities of each of the team members during project execution. In attendance shall be the project delivery team (PDT) comprising of the contractors, and subcontractors, if any, POH and POH’s contractors who are working at WMA under different projects. The meeting will be held after the contract award prior to service commencing. The Contractor shall be responsible to take minutes of the meeting, and send out for review to the team members within 2 working days after the meeting.

4.1.2.2 In-progress Review (IPR) Meetings and Project Status Reports. The Contractor shall provide regular feedback to POH on the progress of its work either through face-to-face meetings, telephone conversations, and project status reports. The Project Status Report shall be prepared in accordance with (IAW) DID MR-085 and include other pertinent items listed throughout this SOW.

The Contractor shall keep a record of each phone conversation, written correspondence, and meeting minutes IAW DID MR-055 and DID MR-045. A copy of these records shall be attached to the Project Status Report for submittal to POH.

In addition, the Contractor (PM or SM) shall provide daily status of the fieldwork to the on-site POH’s representative (OESS) either orally or by written reports; and weekly GIS updates via maps and data reports.

4.1.3 Other Coordination. The Contractor shall assist POH in the coordination and consultation with other federal and state agencies as appropriate and warranted.

In the event that there is a likelihood of the presence of any threatened/endangered species within the project area, either by archival research or field observation, POH will initiate consultation with the U.S.

Wildlife Services with assistance from the Contractor as to the location, and estimated quantity of the species at the site If there is a likelihood of the presence of any significant cultural resources within the project site, the Contractor shall assist POH in the Section 106 consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer

(SHPO).

In addition, the Contractor may be asked to communicate with other environmental consultant firms, who are under contract with POH, regarding archaeological monitoring, public outreach effort, sampling and testing of soil samples for munitions constituents in the areas that have already been cleared. It is necessary to work closely with other POH contractors to ensure an effective and seamless operation in the field.

4.2 Task 2-Preparation of Plans and relating documents

All plans listed in this section and throughout pertinent sections of this SOW shall be submitted in draft form for the government’s review and comment. Then the Contractor shall finalize the plans by incorporating the received comments. The Contractor may not mobilize to the site or begin working until the PWP, the Accident Prevention Plan (APP)/Site Safety and Health Plan (SSHP) and other plans mentioned in this section or other pertinent sections of this SOW have been accepted by the Government.

4.2.1 Project Work Plan (PWP). The contractor shall prepare and submit a site-specific PWP to POH for approval prior to beginning any MEC related activities on the site. To the maximum extent possible, the Contractor shall review and utilize the existing information listed in the (previously approved) Master Work Plan to develop the new PWP. The PWP shall be prepared in accordance with DD Form 1423, EM 1110-1-4009, and DID MR 005-01.

Basically, the PWP shall include the Contractor’s proposed methodology of accomplishing the project objective, the Explosive Safety Plan (DID MR-005-04) for the explosives found and/or proposed for use at the site, the evacuation requirement for remediation, and the time required to complete each of these shall be incorporated into the project schedule. Contractor's staff and the responsibilities of each person shall be listed in the PWP as well.

4.2.1.1 Compact Disk (CD) of the PWP. In addition to the hard copy distribution required by paragraph 6-SUBMITTALS, the Contractor shall provide two copies of the PWP (in Microsoft Word) on CD, to the

POH PM.

4.2.1.2 Project Schedule. The contractor shall submit work schedule and manpower allocation (by task) with the PWP. Any assumptions shall be stated and their basis shall be provided. A digital copy of the resource-loaded schedule compatible with Primavera shall be included. The Contractor shall update the schedule IAW DID MR-085 Project Status Report.

4.2.2 Accident Prevention Plan (APP)/Site Safety and Health Plan (SSHP). The Contractor shall prepare an APP/SSHP IAW DID MR-005-06, and address all the requirements listed in EM 385-1-1 and EP-385-1- 95a. The APP/SSHP shall promote safe and efficient operations while limiting potential exposure to a minimum number of personnel for a minimum time and to the minimum amount of MEC. The plan shall list the names of all personnel who would participate in the field removal action, including personnel performing the archaeological monitoring. The plan shall be accepted by the Contracting Officer or his/her representative before the commencement of field work. Appropriate personal protection equipment as designated by the Contractor’s site safety officer shall be worn when performing fieldwork within the project sites.

The APP/SSHP may be submitted as a separate chapter/appendix in the PWP, or as a stand-alone document.

4.2.3 Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP)

More than 1500 archaeological sites were recorded within the former WMA; therefore, to ensure that these sites are properly protected during MEC removal process, the Contractor shall review pertinent files, records, reports, and conduct interview with experts as necessary to develop an AMP specific to the activities listed under Task 4 of this SOW. The plan shall include discussion on the site background history and environment, the proposal for performing the monitoring with minimal impact to the ongoing MEC work, and the steps to be taken in the event of expected or inadvertent discovery of human remains or significant cultural resources.

The AMP shall be submitted as a stand-alone document and will be used by POH to conduct section 106 consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act.

4.3 Task 3-Base Mapping and GIS

4.3.1 Mapping. The contractor shall perform all location survey and mapping necessary to complete the project objective, adhering to requirements outlined in DID MR-005-07.01. The grid system shall be based upon the Hawaii State Plane coordinate system (NAD83), and be cross-referenced to the Universal Transverse Mercator 1,000 meter grid system. The grid system shall be controlled on a maximum of 100 meters by 100 meters cross referenced to the existing Master Grid System.

4.3.2 GIS. All spatial data gathered in conjunction with this project shall be migrated into the existing spatial database developed especially for the ordnance removal actions at WMA. The existing GIS system contains data from the EE/CA reports, data from the clearance completed by previous Contractors working on MEC removal at WMA, and the location of munitions found. The software used to develop and maintain this system is primarily Geomedia Professional (Intergraph) and ArcMap (ESRI), along with Oracle database and Microsoft Access. All features stored in Oracle are fully SDSFIE compliant. MS Access is used for data display, temporary and incidental data, and abbreviated versions of some of the Oracle tables. All data are cross referenced to the Universal Transverse Mercator Zone 5 North Hawaii State Plane coordinate system (NAD83). POH will be providing the existing system to the Contractor to be used as baseline, and add in data as they become available. The resulting system shall be compliant with the DID MR-005-07.01.

4.4 Task 4- Perform MEC Removal at Sector 15

The contractor shall supply all personnel, tools, equipment, communications, transportation, materials and supervision to integrate, manage, and safely execute the destruction and/or removal, and disposal of MEC and MD to a depth of detection at the northwest corner of Sector 15 in the Pu’ukapu Homesteads (approximately 495 acres) with the following Tax Map Keys (TMK). (approximately 450 acres) with Tax Map Key (TMK) 364008007. See attached map.

TMK No. 3-6-4-4-46 (194.61 acres)

TMK No. 3-6-4-4-47 (200 acres)

TMK No. 3-6-4-4-48 (100 acres)

It is believed that these are undeveloped parcels within the former WMA. However, the Contractor shall address the need and/or extent of evacuations in the PWP.

4.4.1. MEC Removal and Disposal. Under Task 4 the contractor shall conduct the removal process IAW the methodology outlined in the PWP. The various types of ordnance expected to be found at the project sites include small arms, MK-2 hand grenades, land mines, projectiles of various sizes such as 20mm, 37mm, 40mm, 75mm, 105mm, 155mm and possibly Japanese ordnance. All ferrous objects similar in size and mass to the MEC items listed above shall be removed. When MEC and/or MD are found, the Contractor shall immediately notify the on-site POH OESS. The Contractor shall be responsible for the destruction and disposal of all MEC and MD found at the project sites. No intrusive or demolition operation shall be carried out without the presence of POH OESS on-site.

4.4.2 Backfilling Excavations. All excavations and detonation holes shall be cleared and back-filled where work on anomaly is done or ordnance is destroyed.

4.4.3 MEC Accountability. The contractor shall maintain a detailed accounting of all MEC and components encountered. This accounting shall include the amounts of MEC, nomenclature, the identification and condition to include classification IAW DA Memo Munitions Response Terminology dated 21 April 2005, location and depth of MEC, and disposition. This accounting shall be a part of the GIS and shall be included in the Site Removal Report. The accounting system shall also account for all demolition materials used to detonate MEC. The Contractor shall take digital photograph of identifiable MEC found during field activities.

If a scenario is encountered that precludes the contractor from detonating a UXO in-place, such as an unidentifiable UXO is located, or unknown filler is encountered, the on-site POH OE Safety Specialist shall be notified, who in turn will request EOD support.

4.4.4 Disposal/Disposition of Material Potentially Presenting an Explosive Hazard (MPPEH): All MPPEH shall be handled in accordance with Chapter 14, EM 1110-1-4009, date 15 June 2007 and Errata Sheet No.

2, dated 7 November 2007.

4.4.5 Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC).

4.4.5.1 POH OE Safety Specialist will perform QA checks of all phases of the Contractor’s work. Special emphasis will be on the established working grids, e.g. 100 meters by 100 meters. If any ferrous object is found that is similar in size and mass to the MEC expected in that area, within the depth of detection, that grid will be failed, and shall be completely re-swept by the contractor at no cost to the government. A workmanship or safety deficiency will also result in grid failure, and grids failed for these reasons shall also be completely re-swept at no cost to the government.

4.4.5.2 The contractor shall administer a QC Program in accordance with DID MR 005-11 to manage, control, and document his own and his subcontractor's activities. The methodology to accomplish this effort shall be proposed in the PWP, and adhered to in the field. The QC activities shall be documented and included in the Removal Report.

4.4.5.3 Individuals involved in performing MEC removal tasks may be assigned specific responsibilities in support of QC. The QC function shall be separate from management and is not envisioned as a full-time position. The UXO QC Specialist shall be responsible for QC documentation and will periodically ensure elements of the work, such as detection, recovery, storage, transport, and disposal of UXO, are carried out in conformance with the approved PWP and contract provisions. The UXO QC Specialist shall not be involved in any of the ordnance removal tasks.

4.5 Task 5- Perform Archaeological Monitoring

4.5.1 Monitoring during Fieldwork.

An appropriate level of archaeological monitoring shall be required for all fieldwork taking place under Task 4 and potentially Task 6 of this SOW. The Contractor shall conduct the monitoring in accordance with the Government approved AMP discussed in section 4.2.3 above. Qualified personnel (i.e. archaeologist, archaeological monitor) shall perform the monitoring during surface and subsurface MEC operations including, but not limited to, sweeping, removal and earth-disturbing activities, and implement other protection measures for sites to be affected by clearance activities. Archaeological monitoring, recording, and sampling during fieldwork where subsurface cultural features are identified shall be oriented so as to obtain the most data available on the nature, location, and age of extant cultural deposits and other cultural features.

All identified cultural remains and features shall be fully and systematically described, documented, and potentially sampled. Archaeological Monitoring activities shall be performed in a manner so as to minimize impact to the ongoing MEC work.

4.6 Task 6- Geophysical Prove Out (GPO).

4.6.1 The GPO is a geophysical system selection (geophysical instrumentation test plots) to ensure that a particular geophysical system will work at a particular project site. Presently, there already exists 2 GPO areas to support the MEC activities required in Task 4 of this SOW.

4.6.2 After contract award, the Contractor shall be provided with a GPO area to test, and subsequently select his field equipment that would optimize the results of the required work under this T.O. The rationale for the selected geophysical instrumentation shall be documented and provided to the Government.

4.7 Task 78-Field Office and Personnel.

4.7.1 The contractor shall furnish a staff that is qualified IAW MR–025 through education, training and pertinent experience that will be used to manage the complete Waikoloa Maneuver Area project for the duration of this task order as estimated in section 5 of this SOW.

4.7.2 The Contractor shall propose the labor categories, and associated labor man-hours required to establish and maintain a Field Office. The field office shall have personnel available to perform daily and monthly site briefings to POH personnel; give a quarterly briefing to local schools or public groups, as well as run the day-to-day operations of a single or multiple removal action MEC crews. This office shall have Internet connection capabilities for the purposes of posting project information to a Web-based GIS, and active project files available to Government and Contract personnel on a timely manner, for review and comment. The Contractor shall also make provision for a work station within the Field Office for the POH’s representative, and for some limited administrative support such as copying and faxing.

4.7.3 Site Security. The contractor shall provide site physical security (e.g., fencing or guard service) as required by each individual order. At a minimum, the contractor shall maintain all areas to minimize the risk of injury or accident. Work on or near roadways shall be marked with lights and barricades meeting State and local regulations. Where such regulations are not applicable or adequate, the contractor shall minimize the risk of an accident. Special consideration shall be given to site security/safety needs near residential areas where there may be children.

4.7.4 The contractor shall maintain the field office with a limited number of field personnel at the WMA until the completion of the contract as specified in section 5-Period Of Contract Schedule of this SOW.

This is to ensure timely response in the event that MEC are uncovered at the project sites after the fieldwork is complete.

4.8 Task 8- Prepare and Submit Removal Report.

The contractor shall submit a removal report in accordance with DID MR-030. A CD that includes all data and maps produced during field operations, and the associated Final Removal Action Report, shall be delivered with each copy of the report. This Report would be associated with the Removal Action defined in Task 4 above.

5. PERIOD OF CONTRACT SCHEDULE

The following schedule shall be used to complete the contract, and as guideline to submit invoices for partial payment. The tentative award date is April 2009

PROJECT MILESTONE MAXIMU

M (cal)

DAYS

AFTER

AWARD

TENTATIVE DATES ESTIMATED % OF

WORK COMPLETED

Kick off meeting 15 15-May-2009 2%

Submit draft PWP, APP, AMP etc (Task

2) 30 30-May-2009 8%

Government review of Plans

Complete Task 6-Selection of geopgysical instruments

90 30-Jul-2009 10%

Submit final PWP, APP, AMP (Task 2) 105 15-Aug-2009 16%

Start Field Activities

(Task 4, 5, 7) 115 25-Aug-2009 20%

Finish Field Activities w/prelim results 180185 30-Oct-20095-Nov- 2009 75%

Submit Draft Removal Report 210215 30-Nov-20095-Dec-

90%

Government review of draft Report 240245 30-Dec-20095-Jan-

95%

Submit Final Report 270275 30-Jan-20105-Feb-

98%

Government Acceptance of Final report 280285 10-Feb-201015-Feb- 2010 100%

6. SUBMITTALS

6.1 All final text files generated by the contractor and subcontractors under this Contract shall be furnished to the Contracting Officer in Word 6.0 or higher software, IBM PC compatible format. Formal submittals shall be in a format and media that will permit their loading, storage, and use without modification or additional software on the CEHNC GIS workstations. Tables will be in MS Excel spreadsheet format. A CD that includes all data shall be delivered with each copy of the report. The contractor shall furnish copies of the plans, maps, and reports to each addressee listed below in the quantities indicated. The contractor shall use express mail services for delivering these plans and reports. Following each submittal, comments generated as a result of their review shall be incorporated.

ADDRESSEE COPIES

US Army Engineer District, Honolulu 20 ATTN: CEPOH-PP-E (Mr.