Questions_&_Answers.pdf

Biological and Environmental Services Related to Marine and Navigable Waterways Civil Works Activities in the Philadelphia District

Solicitation Number: W912BU-18-R-0044

Questions & Answers

1. Section B, line item 0041 – Sediment Sampling & Analysis (p. 5) has pricing for 50 units associated with it.

Should this be a general category like 0042 – Water Quality Analysis (Bulk) that does not have pricing associated with it? The same goes for the four option years. This was an error, there should be no units associated with the Sediment Sampling Analysis or the Water Quality Analysis – these are headings.

2. Section C.4.D (p. 40) states that laboratories performing chemical sampling and analysis need to be accredited by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC). Is a DoD

Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program acceptable (ELAP) as opposed to a NELAC accreditation?

No. NELAC or NELAP accreditation is required for the labs.

3. Section L.1.a-h (p.201-202) refers to Sections II, IV, V, and Appendices C, D, E, and F. There were no matching sections in the RFP or appendices attached to the RFP. Can they be provided? As stated in L.1 p.201.. Each “individual” evaluating a factor… will receive a rating package. The Appendices are for

“Rators” only.

4. Section M.B.Factor 1.4 (p. 204) specifies that resumes for 20 personnel categories are to be provided but 23 are listed in the same section and 31 are listed in Section C.9 (p. 45). This was an error, there are 22 personnel categories. The Section will be corrected.

a. Should resumes be provided for the miscellaneous labor categories listed in Section C.9? No.

Miscellaneous labor category will be deleted.

b. Archaeologist is listed as a labor category in Section M, Factor 1.4.L (p. 206) but not listed in Section

C.9. Should resumes be provided for this category?Yes, a resume should be provided for the

Archaeology labor category. Section C.9 will be corrected to add labor category.

5. Section M.B.Factor 2.1 (p. 209):

a. Is only one sample report required under the 2–3 major work elements or can multiple reports be submitted per category? 1 sample report should be submitted from at least 2 but no more than

3 of the listed categories. Max number of sample reports provided is 3.

b. Will the reports count against the 75-pg minimum for the Technical Volume or should they be included as an appendix? No, reports will not count against the 75 page minimum. They can be included as an appendix or as a separate report.

6. Section M.B.Factor 4 (p. 212-213): A category for Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority

Institutions is not listed on p. 212 but the note at the top of p. 213 states that this category should be considered

“disadvantaged” and broken out separately. Should this be listed as a subcategory of Small Business

Disadvantaged or listed as a separate category that would contribute to the Small Business Disadvantaged category. HBCU & MI institutions are considered small and disadvantaged and are included under the larger socio-economic category of SDB. Every category other than small business is a subset of the small business category and each has precedence over straight small business. There is no sub-set under small and disadvantaged. HBCUs are counted along with other businesses as SDB.

7. In the FedBizzOps.Gov announcement it states that: Solicitation No. W912BU-18-R-0044 proposals must be emailed to Akiba.t.muldrow@usace.army.mil on or before 16 November 2018. EST. However, Section

L, paragraph L-1 SUBMITTALS, states: Offerors shall submit three (3) copies each of the technical and price proposals. Also in the SF 33, Solicitation, Block 9 (page 1 of 218), it requested for an original and 1 copy is to be submitted on 16 November 2018. Please clarify if the proposals should be submitted electronically; or in a hard copy format. If hard copy format is required, please identify the number of original and copy(ies). Proposal should be submitted in hard copy format. You must submit 3 copies each of the technical and cost proposals and 1 copy of each example report.

8. No minimum font size was included in the RFP. Would a minimum font size of 11 point for all text, and a legible point font in all graphics and tables, be allowed? Yes.

9. Please consider removing from the page count the following items: Table of Contents, Acronym List, Tabs/Dividers, and Sample Reports. These items will not be included in the total page count.

10. Factor 4. Small Business Participation Plan: Is there a preferred template to use in preparing the Small

Business Participation Plan, if so can you please provide it. No.

11. Per Section M, Section C Evaluation Approach, 2 Past Performance Factor, item c. Government/and/or commercial contracts (page 215 of 281). It states: “The offeror and its major subcontractors shall submit a list of all Government and/or commercial contracts awarded to the prime and major subcontractors in the past three years.”

Per Section L, L-2, B Technical Proposal, item 1, it states “The offeror must submit a list of all projects initiated during the last two (2) years, including names and phone numbers of all clients.

Please clarify these two requests. Are you requesting different lists or are these two requests the same? Are we to differential contracts awarded vs. projects initiated? Please confirm that these lists should identify contracts or projects only directly related to the SOW listed in the solicitation. If they are two different lists, in which Factor and section should these lists be presented? Only one list is requested. It should include all projects initiated in the last three years that directly relate to items listed in the SOW in the solicitation.

12. Per Section M, Factor 1, item 4. Professional Qualifications, the offeror is to present resumes at the end of

Factor 1. Since resumes are not page counted, may the resumes be included in an appendix at the end of the

Technical Proposal for ease of page numbering? Yes, resumes may be included as an appendix at the end of the proposal.

13. Per Section B (pages 2 and 3 of 218), the “Effective Period of the Contract” is one Base Year with the option to extend contract for one year each for four option years. However, on page 35 of 218, Item No 0006 requested an amount for the option to extend services for 6-month option period. Please clarify if the 6-month option period is part of the “Effective Period of the Contract”? The 6-month option period is not a part of the effective period of the contract.

14. Per Section M, C. Evaluation Approach, 2. Past Performance, d. Past Performance Evaluation, ii. Relevancy.

It states: “Any past performance information that involves chemical analytical services for environmental sample analysis will be considered relevant. The relevancy of the offeror’s past performance will be rated in accordance with the below table:

Adjectival Rating Description

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

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

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

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

Please clarify if the USACE Philly determines that Past Performance involving chemical analytical services for environmental sample analysis (SOW item D) is more relevant than other SOW items (i.e., SOW items

B, C, E, and F) or do past performances involving essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires have the same level of relevancy? Reference to Chemical Analytical services being more relevant is an error. Past performance for all items in the SOW have the same level or relevancy.

15. Please provide the worksheet in Excel format for the Base Year, Option Years 1-4, and the Option to Extend

Services for costing purposes. This was stated in error.. an excel spreadsheet will not be provided.

16. Section C, Item 9 Professional Qualifications, paragraph c (page 46), please confirm if Section B line items

0002, 1002, 2002, 3002 and 4002 should read Biologist/Ecologist or Biologist. These line items should read Biologist.

17. Section L, Paragraph L-3, Item 1 (page 198): The requirement in this section states that “at least one chemist/toxicologist and one engineer” are required. Are chemist/toxicologist considered the same category or should they be separated? Also, in Section C, Item 9, Professional Qualifications, paragraph b. (page 45), is there a difference between the requirements for an Analytical Chemist and a Chemist (not listed in Section

B) in terms of labor rates? Reference to these labor categories was an error and will be removed. There is no requirement for chemists or engineers for this solicitation.

18. Per the required Standard Format for Personal Resumes on page 208/209 of 218, item 3, the offeror is to provide the office location for all resumes. However, in Section M, Factor 1, item 4 (page 204 of 218), it states: “Each employee must be listed as full-time, part-time, or consultant.” and “In addition, their home office location must also be listed.” Since employment status is not specified in the Standard Format, may this information be added to the Standard Format? Yes. Lastly, is “office location” specified in the Standard

Format the same as the home office location requested in Section M, Factor 1, item 4? Yes.

19. Is the Small Business Participation Plan (Factor 4) part of the 75 page limit of the Technical Proposal. No

20. The FedBizzOps.Gov announcement for Solicitation No. W912BU-18-R-0044, states that questions on the

RFP are due no later than COB 1 November 2018. Will responses be issued intermittently, as questions are received, or will USACE Philadelphia wait until all questions are received on 1 November 2018 to answer the questions/provide clarification. All questions are by COB 01 November 2018. Questions and Answers will be posted 02 November 2018.

21. The solicitation has three different titles…. Please specify the official title. Biological and Environmental

Services Related to Marine and Navigable Waterways Civil Works Activities in the Philadelphia

District.

22. Section L-2 of the RFP, in (B), (1) requests a "list of all projects initiated during the last two years, including names and phone numbers of all clients." Is the intent of this list to demonstrate qualifications and responsiveness? Our firm has hundreds of projects initiated in the last two years in the scope of work. Can we provide a representative listing of similar projects with references? Yes. Please also refer to Question 2 below for further clarification on Project Experience. Yes, a representative list is acceptable if they have that many projects. I would recommend highlighting ones in our District if this is the case.

23. Section M, Factor 2, Past Performance, Paragraph 1 requires that we provide project descriptions of work completed within the past 5 years. We assume this is different from the table/list of projects requested in L-

2 and these projects can reflect our work performed within last five years, not two. Also, regarding the time frame, can we present projects that were initiated more than 5 years ago and/or are ongoing, as long as the work was substantially completed within the past five years? This factor says they must describe at least

5 projects within the last 5 years that demonstrates the firm's technical, management and administrative capabilities to complete environmental and biological services directly related to the

SOW. While this is a different list than the one requested in L-2, they can include some of the same projects if applicable. It is fine to include projects older than 5 years if most of the work was completed within the past 5 years.

24. Section M, B, Factor 1 Professional Qualifications Paragraph 4 requires we provide qualifications/resumes for 20 personnel categories listed as key. The same section then lists 23 categories. Section C, Statement of

Work, Paragraph 9 lists 30 categories. Please clarify if you want only 20 resumes, can we provide those that best demonstrate our team's qualifications to perform the work? Previously addressed

25. For the Project Manager role and qualifications identified in the RFP, given the nature of the work for this contract, could the "related field" written in the RFP include areas such as Ecology or Biology, in addition to urban and regional planning, water resources planning, etc.? Yes.

26. In the A. Rating Method on page 201of 218, are Appendix C and Appendix D forms and tools for the

Corps to use to rate our projects or do one or both these forms need to be filled out by consultants or their clients for Projects? The documents referenced as Appendix C and Appendix D were not provided with the

RFP. If Corps-forms only, could we still obtain these Appendices to fully understand how the Corps will rate the submissions? Previously Addressed.

27. Please confirm that Example Reports are to be submitted separately and do not count toward the 75-page count. As these reports are separate files, can we submit these electronically on CD rather than hard copy?

Previously Addressed.

28. Please clarify the number of hard copies required. The Solicitation SF33 says "an original and 1 copy" and

Section L-1) says "three copies of the technical and price volume and one copy of each example report."

Also, please clarify if you want an electronic copy of the proposal along with the hard copies. Previously

Addressed.

29. The RFP cover indicates that an original and one copy are to be submitted. Section L on page 197 of 218 indicates three copies of technical and cost. Which is correct? 3 Copies of each for technical proposal and cost proposal. One copy of each example report.

30. There are inconsistencies in the labor classifications on the rate sheet with the Section 9 qualification descriptions starting on page 45 and Section L qualifications starting on page 204. Which qualification descriptions should be used? As an example, the labor category 0001 Archeologist corresponds with

Section 9 r) Archeologist/Diver on page 48 and Section L l) Archeologist on page 206. The description for

Section 9 r) and Section L l) are the same, but their titles are different. In addition, the labor category 0003

Diver/UW Archeologist corresponds with Section 9 r) Archeologist/Diver on page 48 and Section L w)

Diver/Underwater Archeologist on page 208. In addition, the labor category 0008 Senior UW Archeologist corresponds with Section 9 u) Senior Underwater Archeologist on page 48; however there is no Senior

Underwater Archeologist in Section L. Please clarify the titles and descriptions for these professional qualification categories. Resolved in a previous response.

31. In the first paragraph on page 39 of 218 the solicitation mentions that Phase I, II, and III terrestrial investigations are anticipated; however, within the professional qualifications Section ("s" on page 207 of

218) only maritime archaeology qualifications for the Principal Investigator (cultural) are described.

Should we assume a terrestrial Principal Investigator (cultural) should also be included in this category as well? Yes To correspond with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires Principal

Investigator for terrestrial and a Principal Investigator for maritime, which are most typically separate people to meet those qualifications/requirements.

32. There is one 0005 Field Technician labor classification, but three wage determination rates for archaeological technician I, II, and III shown later in the RFP. Should only one of the three rates be chosen for this contract? Yes.

33. The 0048 Geomorphological Analysis is shown as a unit rate. Can you clarify what you envision as analysis? Is it soil sample laboratory analysis (e.g., grain size) cost or do you expect a geomorphologist to provide a single rate for a consultation? This would be difficult as the site type, depth, and topographic location could greatly affect the level of effort/cost. This is for a geomorphological analysis, not a consultation with a geomorphologist.

34. Section B (Pricing Schedule) and Section C (Professional Qualifications)) of the solicitation reference a

UXO Technician III. Per Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board (DDESB) Technical Paper 18, the experience and qualifications indicated in Section C.9.cc are more applicable to a Senior UXO

Supervisor (SUXOS). Please confirm that offerors should assume “UXO Technician III” will be replaced with “SUXOS” in the solicitation. UXO III is the correct labor category.

35. In Section C, paragraph 9, pages 45 through 50, 31 personnel categories are listed. This corresponds, for the most part with the disciplines descriptions in the proposal labor rate costing table, including the ones listed under the “miscellaneous” labor category. Under Section M, Factor 1. Professional Qualifications, paragraph 4 on page 204 states that resumes must be provided as follows: “Professional qualifications for all twenty (20) personnel categories listed as key personnel assignments (including subconsultants) must be included.” However, listed in a) though w) of this section lists 23 personnel categories.. The primary difference between Section C, paragraph 9 and Section M, Factor 1, paragraph 4 are the 8 miscellaneous disciplines (although there are other inconsistencies as provided in the previous questions). Is it your intent for proposers not to submit resumes for the miscellaneous labor categories? Please clarify the personnel category resumes that must be included. This issue was addressed in a previous question/reply.

36. In Section L, paragraph L-3 1) on page 198, it states that the staff should consist of at least one chemist/toxicologist and one engineer. This language is not included in Section M, Factor 1, paragraph 1, starting on page 203. Since these are shown as miscellaneous categories and not included under Factor 1, will the proposal be graded down if these positions are part of the team subcontractor’s staff? This issue was addressed in a previous question/reply.

37. In Section M, Factor 1, paragraph 2 on page 204, it states that the organization chart “shall delineate the

Firm’s chain of supervision/reporting and various departments…” Please clarify if you are requesting the chain of supervision/reporting that is intended for implementing contract-related scope elements of the work included in SOW for this solicitation or are you requesting an organizational chart that identifies chain of supervision/reporting related to the established departments within our firm? The organization chart should be related to how this contract would be managed for the current SOW.

38. “Consultants” is described as “Personnel hired or subcontracted for their specialized knowledge and expertise and must carry academic and experiential qualifications.” Can these be regular staff of the prime if they carry academic and experiential qualifications and are considered technical experts in their field?

No. If they are regular staff, they should be listed as such. There would be no need for additional consultants if the firm already has the qualifications required.

39. Is there a limit to the number of resumes included (i.e., can more than one resume be submitted for each position, where it is determined to be appropriate? Yes, more than one resume for each labor category may be submitted but it should be limited to people who are expected to actually perform work under this contract.

40. In the standard format for personnel resumes, for the following “3. Company affiliation, office location and number of years employed” does years employed refer to years employed with the current company or years employed throughout the employee’s life? Current company. The past experience part of the resume would address other jobs held.

41. In Section M, Factor 2, paragraph 1 on Page 209, “Information must demonstrate the firm’s ability to respond to, and complete, in a timely and accurate fashion.” Does the selected project need to be completed or are substantially completed projects acceptable? They can be substantially completed if it still demonstrates the information requested.

42. All of Items 0029 – 0037: Is the pricing to be for equipment rental fees only? Or for example side scan sonar, should we include operators in the daily cost so that it may be a field ready cost? Or for Lg Sample

Boat (Rental) (Capable of Ocean Sampling). Should crew be included in cost? The same applies to all equipment items listed. Equipment pricing should be for the equipment only since it is assumed operators would be covered under the labor categories. For boats, any crew that would not be part of the labor categories needed for the work should be included.

43. For the daily and weekly cost of equipment, should mobilization/demobilization be included or just the daily/weekly cost with operator, since site location can have an impact on mobilization/demobilization costs? That would be based on how you generally put together cost proposals.

44. In daily and weekly rental cost, what should be included as a work-day (e.g., 8 hours)? I assume that is set by the rental company – aren’t most daily rentals a 24 hr period?

45. Items 0038 and 0039: Will they be marine or freshwater benthic organisms, or both? Mostly marine but some fresh water may be required at times.

46. Item 0040: What type of miscellaneous equipment do you anticipate? Field or lab water quality meters or just lab equipment? It is unknown at this time. This category is meant to cover unanticipated needs.

47. Item 0041: What costs are to be included in the Sediment Sampling and Analysis? This is included in the

“test total,” but could be interpreted as including labor. Addressed previously – this is a section heading, no cost should be associated with this or 00442 – Water Quality Analysis.

48. Item 0041AA: What costs are to be included in the Sample Collection? This is included in the “test total,” but could be interpreted as including labor. This is up the discretion of each firm. Some firms charge for sample collection, some do not.

49. Will projects featured from within the Philadelphia District weigh more heavily in the evaluation versus projects that include a similar scope, but that occurred in other districts within the North Atlantic Division?

Yes

50. Regarding labor categories and personnel resume requirements. The Labor Categories (listed in Section B), the professional qualification (listed in Section C), and the key personnel (listed in Section M) do not align, i.e., reference different types/number of positions. Please clarify and/or provide a uniform list? Addressed previously

51. Is there a formal due date for contractor questions? COB November 01, 2018

52. Section C, page 39/40 of 218, paragraph D, Chemical Sampling and Analysis states that “A listing of all lab certifications should be included in the proposal submitted for this contract.” Where should this list be included in the technical proposal, and can this list be excluded from the 75-page count. Addressed previously.

53. In addition to the resumes, we respectfully request that the following items also be excluded from the 75-page limit of the technical proposal: table of contents, list of figures, list of acronyms, the sample reports, and the small business participation plan. Addressed previously.

54. L-2 Preparation of Proposals, B) Technical Approach, Item 1) requires offerors “to submit a list of all projects initiated during the last two (2) years, including names and phone numbers of all clients”. Where should this be included in the Technical Proposal? We respectfully suggest it be included in Section M, Factor 3, paragraph 2. “List references to support quality of work and timeliness of contract completion.”

Please clarify. That is fine but I would recommend referencing that section if it is also asked for somewhere else.

55. L-2 Preparation of Proposals, B) Technical Approach, Item 4) requires offerors to provide “A discussion of the most recent and/or relevant experience of the firm dealing with ecosystem restoration and/or mitigation features”. However, Section M, Factor 2. Past Performance also requires experience in five SOW areas one of which is “Mitigation/Ecosystem Restoration”. Does the government expect to see a separate discussion of the offerors experience specifically for “ecosystem restoration and/or mitigation features” per the L-2 requirement? Please clarify. No separate discussion is necessary. Again, I would make reference to where the info is asked for, if it is in more than one location.

56. Section L-3 Minimum Qualifications. How does the requirement for eight full-time staff interrelate with the

23 personnel categories identified in Section M, Factor 1? Are the eight personnel a subset of the 23 that must be “permanent full-time staff” or are the eight a separate set of personnel? If they are separate from the 23 personnel categories do you require resumes for these eight personnel? The 8 personnel are a subset of the 23.

57. Section L, page 201 of 218, paragraph A, Rating Method, identifies multiple appendices that were not included with the solicitation. Is the government going to provide these appendices?

Addressed previously

58. Section M, page 209 of 218, Factor 2 Past performance, paragraph 1. states “The offeror should clearly demonstrate its technical capability and experience by identifying and describing at least five (5) projects within the past five (5) years”. The requirement is “at least five”, so if we submit more than five project will they be evaluated equally to the first five? Yes. Is there any advantage to submitting more than five projects, i.e., do you receive a higher evaluation? No.

59. Section M, page 215 of 218, section 2. Past Performance Factor, paragraph a. states “Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in

Appendix D.” Is the government going to provide Appendix D?

Addressed previously

60. Section M, page 213 of 218, C. Evaluation Approach states: “All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST). Specifics of the Source Selection Team are included in Appendix A”.

Is the Government going to provide Appendix A? Addressed previously

61. Section M, Factor 3. Item 3 indicates: “Technical proposal should contain all requested information and follow the format as described in Section L.” However, Section L identifies significantly fewer requirements than presented in Section M and DOES NOT specifically reference the individual factors as outlined in Section M. Please confirm we should follow the Section M criteria outline and incorporate the

Section L criteria into the M outline. Yes.

62. Section M, Factor 3, Item 3 indicates that the technical proposal should “contain high quality graphics.”

Can you elaborate on this statement, i.e., will proposals with more, well-presented graphics be evaluated more favorably? Yes, all graphics need to be legible and an accurate representation of graphics you would use in reports.

63. In regard to Factor 4 the government has stated “all offerors, both small and large businesses, are required to submit Small Business Participation Plan information in accordance with DFARS 215.304….” Would the government be willing to accept an approved Commercial Small Business Plan in conjunction with

Small Business Utilization Goals for this Program? A Small Business Participation Plan information in accordance with DFARS is required.

64. Section L-3, Minimum Qualifications states “The technical proposal must also include vitae for the

Principal Investigator (PI), main supervisory personnel, and consultants…” Are curriculum vitae required for these personnel in addition to their key personnel resumes? If so, please consider excluding them from the page count, as vitae for these personnel can be lengthy depending on individual experience and qualifications. Vitea are excluded from resume page count.

65. We respectively request and extension of the proposal due date. We are awaiting the government’s response to questions addressing multiple inconsistencies proposal requirements which affect our ability to finalize multiple Factors of the proposal (i.e., final list of disciplines for key personnel, missing appendices for past performance, etc.). When answers to these questions are received, we will need time to strategize and adequately address.

Questions were due on 01 November 2018. Questions and Answers will be posted on 02 November

2018. An extension will not be granted at this time.

66. Section M, Factor 2. Past Performance, paragraph 2. Ability to document and prepare high quality written reports. Would the government consider allowing offeror's to submit the sample reports as electronic copies/PDF only? Technical reports can be quite lengthy and may result in hundreds of pages of attachments to the hard copy proposal.

All proposals shall be submitted to:

100 Penn Square East

Wanamaker Building

Philadelphia, PA 19107

Attn: Akiba Muldrow – Contracting Branch (6th floor)