Amendment_0003-W912DQ-17-R-3004-KSAAP-20170203.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

The purpose of Amendment 0003 is to provide:

a.) Revise Section-Attachments/Figures/Table List: Figure 5 has been revised to 2.5;

b.) Revise Section 00 21 00 - Para 3.1, Section 2 Proposal Characteristics, Para. f. Tab 2 is deleted-total of tw o remaining tabs.

c.) Revise Section 00 21 00 - Para 3.1, Section 6-Subcontractors;

d.) Revise Section 00 21 00 - Volume 2, Factor 4 - Cost: Submission Requirements;

e.) Revise Section 00 10 00 – Scope of Work (para 1, 3.1, 3.9, 3.15 (WAD 1-Air Monitoring, Assumptions-Attachment 3), (WAD 4-Soil Removal para 3.18), (WAD 6-Off-Site Soil, Bedrock and Water Disposal-Assumptions (Attachment 3), (WAD 7-Environmental Soil Sampling and Analysis-para 2).

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1 48

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 02-Feb-2017

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 W912DQ-17-R-3004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

29-Dec-2016

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

03-Feb-2017

CODE

USACE, KANSAS CITY +

FEDERAL BLDG CT-H 601 E 12TH ST RM 647

KANSAS CITY MO 64106-2896

W912DQ 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DQ-17-R-3004

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 11 00 - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENTS / FIGURES / TABLES

ATTACHMENTS / FIGURES / TABLE LIST

Attachments Attachment 1 – Historical Documents

1a Final Remedial Action Report, 1200 Area, 2011 1b Final Corrective Measures Implementation Report, 1200 Area Settling Lagoons Effluent Ditches and

Pond 3 Corrective Measures Design 1c Draft-Final Pre-Design Investigation Work Summary, 1200 Area Pilot Studies for Contaminated

Groundwater, 2016 1d Building 1206 Construction Drawings (various years) 1e Barricade 1234 Drawing, 1989

Attachment 2 - WAD Level Summary Attachment 3 - Assumptions Attachment 4 – Construction Scheduling Attachment 5 – Quality Control System

Figures Figure 1 - Location Map Figure 2 - Installation Map Figure 3 - 1200 Production Area Excavation Areas Figure 4 - 1200 Production Area New Excavation Areas, Area 1 Figure 2.5 - 1200 Production Area New Excavation Areas, Area 2 Figure 6 - 1200 Production Area New Excavation Areas, Areas 3 and 4 Figure 7 - 1200 Production Area New Excavation Areas, Area 5 Figure 8 - Area 3 Cross-Section Figure 9 - Area 5 Excavation Cross-Section Figure 10 - Conceptual Site Model-rev Figure 11 - 1200 Production Area Monitoring Well Locations

Tables

Table 1- Submittals Table 2 - Well Construction Details Table 3 - Well Use Table 4 - Excavation Volume Estimates Table 5 - Static Water Levels

(End of Attachments / Figures / Table List)

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFEROR

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1.0 GENERAL PROPOSAL INFORMATION

The proposal should be practical, legible, clear and coherent. Offerors are discouraged from providing information not required by the Solicitation.

2.0 GENERAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

All offerors shall be required to submit a proposal with the minimum content as specified herein. Proposals without the minimum content may be rejected. Proposals will be received until the date and time indicated on Standard Form 1442 at the following address:

U.S. Army Engineer District, Kansas City Federal Building Room 647 ATTN: CECT-NWK-H/Shelley Thomas 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, Missouri 64106-2896

3.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

1. In order to be considered for award of a contract for the requirements of this solicitation, the offeror must submit a proposal with its offer. Failure to submit a complete proposal may result in the entire offer being rejected.

The proposals shall be submitted in Volumes as follows. Submit the proposal in tabbed, three-ring binders identified by the Solicitation Number, project title, name, address, and telephone number of the offeror.

Arrange tabs as follows:

Volume 1, Technical Proposal:

FACTOR 1 Company Experience FACTOR 2 Past Performance FACTOR 3 Local Preference

Volume 2: Cost Proposal

FACTOR 4 Cost Proposal

2. Proposal Characteristics

a) Each Volume shall contain a table of contents and all pages of each factor shall be sequentially numbered. All text must be legible and easily read. Submit the SF 1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the offeror, in Volume 2. Offerors shall limit Volume 1, Technical Proposal, Factor 1, Company Experience, to a maximum of 5 pages (1 pages for each project) utilizing the form provided below. Pages in excess of 5 will not be evaluated. Factor 2 – Past Performance will not be counted towards this page limitation. All text shall be a minimum of size 10 font and 1 inch margins.

b) Volumes shall be submitted in both hard copy and electronic copy in the following quantities:

Volume 1 – Technical Proposal - Original & 4 copies. Electronic copies shall be submitted in PDF format.

Volume 2 – Cost Proposal - Original & 2 copies. Electronic copies shall be submitted in Excel and PDF format.

Electronic copies should be equivalent to the printed original copy and be searchable or Optical Character Recognition (OCR) formatted. OCR is a common method of digitizing printed texts so that they can be electronically searched, stored more compactly, displayed on-line, and used in machine processes such as machine translation, text-to-speech, key data extraction and text mining.

c) Each Volume of the proposal shall be identified by the Solicitation Number, project title (Former

Kansas Army Ammunition Plant – 1200 Area Corrective Measure Implementation, Parsons, Kansas), name, address, and telephone number of the offeror, and the following on the volume in bold letters:

VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

VOLUME 2: COST PROPOSAL

d) The Technical proposal shall not refer the reviewer to information contained in the Cost proposal.

e) Additional Information to be provided in Volume 1.

Tab 1 - For joint ventures, the information required by paragraph "Joint Ventures" (if applicable).

Tab 2 - Subcontractor letters of commitment as required by paragraph “Subcontractors” (if applicable).

f) Additional Information to be provided in Volume 2.

Tab 1 - Adequate Accounting System, the information required by paragraph 12 below.

Tab 2 - Pro Forma Requirements. The following information should be submitted with Volume 2 and labled “Pro Forma Requirements”. This information consists of the following:

i. Offeror will submit a cover letter containing:

a. Solicitation number

b. Name, address, email and telephone and fax numbers of the offeror

c. Names, title, email and telephone and fax numbers of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this RFP.

d. Name, title and signature of the person authorized to sign the proposal

e. A statement specifying agreement with all terms, conditions and provisions included in the Solicitation

f. CAGE Codes for the offeror and all teaming partners who participated in the Factor 1 – Company Experience projects.

ii. The Offer (the SF1442) duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company. Include the offeror’s DUNS number in block 14.

iii. Acknowledgement of all amendments to the Solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 (amendment form).

iv. Complete Section 00 45 00 of the RFP (Representations and Certifications), Printed Entity Record from System for Award Management (SAM).

4.0 INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS

Technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation shall be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at (https://www.projnet.org). To submit and review inquiry items, prospective offerors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access. A prospective offeror who submits a comment /question will receive an acknowledgement of their comment/question via email. Another email to the same address will notify the prospective offeror once the reply is available for viewing.

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

The Solicitation Number is: W912DQ-17-R-3004 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: QU9FXH-W59B7Z

Instructions for first-time ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

2. Identify the Agency. Select agency USACE.

3. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

4. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

5. Click Continue. A page will then open saying that a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

6. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

7. Click Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

Instructions for future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be provided any type of password. You will utilize your Secret Question and Secret Answer to log in.

2. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

3. Identify the Agency. Select agency USACE.

4. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

5. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

6. Click Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret Question.

7. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries at 12:00 pm, Central Standard Time on January 30, 2017 in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response to inquiries and amend the solicitation if necessary.

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

The ProjNet call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago) or by appointment for OCONUS. The telephone number for the Call Center is 1-800-428-HELP. Email to staff@rcesupport.com.

5.0 JOINT VENTURES

Joint Ventures shall submit the following additional documentation regarding their business entities:

1) A certified copy of their Joint Venture agreement.

2) A detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages, where appropriate.

a. The relationship of the joint venture parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit distribution or loss sharing.

b. The management approach of the joint venture in terms of who will conduct, direct, supervise and control the project and have custody and control of the assets of the Joint Venture and perform the duties necessary to complete the work.

c. The structure of the joint venture and decision-making responsibilities of the Joint Venture parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of the work.

d. Identification of the key personnel having authority to legally bind the Joint Venture to subcontracts and state who will provide or contract for the labor and materials for the Joint Venture.

e. Identification of party maintaining the Joint Venture bank accounts for the payment of all expenses and the deposits of all receipts, keep the books and records, and pay applicable taxes for the Joint Venture.

f. Identification of party furnishing the facilities, such as office supplies and telephone service.

g. Identification of party having overall control of the Joint Venture.

Other sections of the proposal shall identify, where appropriate, whether key personnel are employees of the individual Joint Venture parties and identify the party, or hired as employees of the Joint Venture.

The Joint Venture parties’ experience and/or past performance will be included as the experience and/or past performance of the Joint Venture.

6.0 SUBCONTRACTORS

If an offeror wishes to receive credit for the experience or past performance of a subcontractor, the offeror must submit a letter of commitment to use the proposed subcontractor on the project, signed both by the subcontractor and the offeror. The commitment letter must be submitted even if the subcontractor is in some way affiliated with the offeror (for example, the subcontractor is a subsidiary of a joint venture partner, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the joint venture partner is also a subsidiary). Subcontractor letters of commitment will not be counted towards the page limit for that Factor.

SAMPLE LETTER OF COMMITMENT to USE SUBCONTRACTOR

[COMPANY LETTERHEAD]

TO: Contracting Officer, Kansas City District, United States Army Corps of Engineers

SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Contract for [insert project name]

Dear Sir or Madam:

[Insert name of offeror] and [insert name of subcontractor] hereby make the unequivocal commitment that, in the event that the company receives award of the Contract for [insert project name], [insert name of subcontractor] will perform the following work required by the Contract.

[Insert list of tasks to be performed by the subcontractor]

Sincerely, [Authorized Official]

[Legal Name of Offeror]

Date: __________

[Subcontractor]

[Legal Name of Subcontractor]

Date: ______

7.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government reserves the right to enter into discussions. In the event that discussions are not necessary then the Government intends to award without discussions, to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation and is determined to be the Best Value to the Government, utilizing the tradeoff process.

The technical factors, when combined are significantly more important than the Cost Factor. Factor 1 – Company Experience is the most important. Factors 2 and 3 are less important than Factor 1, and approximately equal to each other. Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the offeror providing the lowest priced proposal.

8.0 SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

All proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with informal source selection procedures. The principal objective of this process is to select a responsible offeror who submits the offer that is the Best Value to the Government, utilizing the tradeoff process. The process is designed to ensure the impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of all proposals received in response to this solicitation.

(a) Source Selection Organization

The source selection organization is established as a separate organization and management chain of command whose only purpose is to accomplish the objective above. The organization consists of a Source Selection Authority (SSA) and a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). The SSEB is comprised of separate Technical Evaluation and Price Evaluation teams. The organization is designed to ensure active ongoing involvement of appropriate contracting, technical, logistics, legal, price analysis, small business, and other functional staff management expertise.

(b) Source Selection Procedure

The source selection procedures will begin with an initial review of proposals and continue with a technical and cost evaluation conducted by the SSEB. The SSEB shall evaluate the proposals based solely on the evaluation criteria identified above. The proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated individually to select the most advantageous proposal. The Government reserves the right to consider and evaluate information regarding past performance from sources outside the proposal. The results of the SSEB evaluations will be presented to the SSA, who will make the final source selection decision or determine whether it is appropriate to engage in clarifications or communications prior to the establishment of a competitive range, or to establish a competitive range and conduct discussions with those offerors that are included in the competitive range. All communications leading to establishment of the competitive range will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.306(b).

If a competitive range is established, discussions will be conducted with offerors who are included in the competitive range. After conclusion of discussions and receipt of final revised proposals (if applicable), the SSEB will complete the evaluation and establish the final technical ratings and present them to the SSA.

The SSA will then review the proposals and make the final source selection decision.

The Government is not responsible for information overlooked during the evaluation which is not located in the appropriate proposal section.

To ensure the evaluation credit is appropriately received for proposal material submitted, do not incorporate by reference documents not contained in the proposal.

9.0 DEBRIEFING OFFERORS

Offerors may request a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505 Pre-award Debriefing of Offerors, and FAR

15.506 Post-award Debriefing of offerors.

10.0 FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

1. VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL

Factor Location Description Relative Importance FACTOR 1 Vol. 1 Company Experience Most Important Technical Factor

FACTOR 2 Vol. 1 Past Performance Less important than Factor 1;

approximately equal to Factor 3.

FACTOR 3 Vol. 1 Local Business Less important than Factor 1;

approximately equal to Factor 2.

3. VOLUME 2 – COST

Factor Location Description Relative Importance FACTOR 4 Vol. 2 Cost (Standard Form 1442 and

Proposal Bid Schedules) Technical Factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost

VOLUME 1, FACTOR 1 – Company Experience.

Submission Requirements

The offeror shall submit a project portfolio of up to five (5) relevant projects to be evaluated for this factor. If more than five projects are submitted, only the first five projects will be evaluated. A project is defined as work performed at one site, or at a single installation. An Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) is not a project. The projects should describe the specific work, identify whether it was performed as the prime, or subcontractor. The projects should demonstrate experience with similar contaminants, materials and construction techniques necessary to complete the requirements included under this solicitation. Cost and schedule control methods employed during the projects should also be described. A project will be considered relevant only if it is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work described in this solicitation. These projects must have been completed in the five (5) year period preceding the date of this solicitation or started within the past five (5) year period and be at least 50% complete at the time of this solicitation.

Projects included in the portfolio shall demonstrate the breadth and depth of the offeror’s experience as it relates to the work described in this solicitation.

The offeror shall use the form provided below in providing this information.

If the offeror is a Joint Venture combining two or more companies, state whether each project was performed by the same Joint Venture. Each member of a Joint Venture shall demonstrate experience commensurate with its proposed role on this project.

The Government may contact and interview project references. Reference information will not be revealed to other parties

Company Experience (Up to 5 projects)

KSAAP 1200 Area Corrective Measure– Similar Experience to SOW

Project Name:

Client: USACE USEPA Other

Offeror: Prime SubContractor

If other than Prime Offeror, name of Team Subcontractor or Contractor:

Site Location (City/State):

Client Name/Company: Client Phone:

Start Date: mm/yyyy Completion Date: :

mm/yyyy

% of Project Compete: Project Cost:

Contract Type: Cost Reimbursable Firm Fixed

Other – Describe:

Contaminant(s):

Media: : Soil Groundwater

Active Industrial Area: YES NO

Dewatering & Water Treatment: YES NO

Bedrock Excavation: YES NO

Hexavalent Chromium contamination: YES NO

Low‐flow groundwater sampling: YES NO

Project Description

VOLUME 1, FACTOR 2 - Past Performance.

For each of the projects submitted under Factor 1, the offeror shall provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ) included in the solicitation to a representative of the owner that can provide the owner’s opinion of the offeror’s past performance for the project. Completed PPQ forms should be submitted with your proposal. The PPQ does not have to be sent directly from the client. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Shelley Thomas via email at Shelley.Thomas@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the completed questionnaires are submitted by the closing date. If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact the Contract Specialist at (816) 389-3552.

For each of the projects submitted under Factor 1, to ensure the agency has all relevant past performance information, the offeror also should submit copies of Federal/DoD/Navy/Army performance reviews that are likely already in the agency’s databases or likely within the agency’s arm’s reach, i.e., Contractor’s copy of CCASS or CPARS evaluations. To improve accuracy of database searches, the offeror will also provide the CAGE Codes for the prime contractor and all teaming partners, i.e. key subcontractors, Joint Venture Partners, whose experience is being relied upon for Factor 1.

Offerors should organize all Past Performance Information based on the Factor 1 Projects, which normally have project titles and are numbered 1-5, so that reviewers can match the owner’s opinion with the corresponding Factor 1 Project. There is no page limit for this factor.

The Government will evaluate the responses from the customers from which Past Performance Questionnaires have been received. The Government may contact and interview the owner’s representative on the PPQ, and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the owner’s representative, if the owner’s representative is not available. 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 the offeror.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

At no time during this process, nor during the debriefing, nor after award, will the names of the individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance be revealed to the offerors or to any other party. If discussions are held, offerors may be afforded the opportunity to respond to adverse comments made by references in accordance with guidelines identified in FAR Part 15.3. In this case, comments will be extracted and provided to the offeror. Copies of the questionnaires will not be furnished to the offeror and will remain confidential.

SAMPLE TRANSMITTAL LETTER

AND

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE

Date_______________ To: _________________________________

We have listed your firm as a reference for work we have performed for you as listed below. Our firm has submitted a proposal under a project advertised by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), an evaluation of our firm’s past performance will be completed by the Corps of Engineers. Your candid response to the attached questionnaire will assist the evaluation team in this process.

We understand that you have a busy schedule and your participation in this evaluation is greatly appreciated. Please complete the enclosed questionnaire as thoroughly as possible. Space is provided for comments.

Please respond in time for us to include the questionnaire with our proposal, which is due on _____________. Only one response from each office is required. If at all possible, we suggest that you individually answer this questionnaire and then coordinate your responses with that of _________________, to forge a consensus on one overall response from your organization. Please return completed questionnaires to the following:

If you would prefer to respond directly to USACE, your completed questionnaire may be sent to the following address:

U.S. Army Engineer District, Kansas City ATTN: CECT-NWK-M/Shelley Thomas Federal Building Room 647

601 East 12 th

Street Kansas City, Missouri 64106-2896

The questionnaires can also be e-mailed to Shelley.Thomas@usace.army.mil.

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE

AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE

COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE

THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE

HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR.

HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT

THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT

TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS YOUR EVALUATION OF THE

CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues?

(Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

Volume 1, Factor 3: Local Preference

Offerors shall submit the below representations and supporting documentation.

Section 2912 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-160 established a preference for contracting with local, small, and small disadvantaged businesses for work associated with closing or realigning military installations under a base closure law. This preference explicitly includes "contracts to carry out activities for the environmental restoration and mitigation" of such installations. Pub. L. No. 103-160, Sec. 2912(a) (set forth at 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2687 note (1994)). Businesses located in the vicinity of a military installation that is being closed or realigned under a base closure law, including 10 U.S.C. 2687, and small disadvantaged businesses shall be provided maximum practicable opportunity to participate in acquisitions that support the closure or realignment, including acquisitions for environmental restoration and mitigation. The Contracting Officer conducted market research, and determined that there is a reasonable expectation that offers will be received from responsible business concerns located in the vicinity of the military installation that is being closed or realigned.

Local area. Based on market research, the local area is: Labette County, KS; Cherokee County, KS; Crawford County, KS; Montgomery County, KS; Neosho County, KS; Wilson County, KS; Craig County, OK; Nowata County, OK.

Representations.

The Offeror shall complete the following representations.

*The Offeror represents that it [] does or [] does not reside or primarily do business in the designated local area.

If the Offeror represents that it resides or primarily does business in the area, the Offeror shall furnish documentation to support its representation.

*The Offeror represents that it [] does or [] does not commit to hire residents of the local area. If the Offeror represents that it commits to hire residents of the designated local area, the Offeror shall furnish a plan to support its representation.

*The Offeror represents that it [] does or [] does not commit to hire subcontractors in the local area. If the Offeror represents that it commits to subcontractors of the designated local area, the Offeror shall furnish a plan to support its representation.

VOLUME 2, FACTOR 4 – Cost

Offerors shall submit the bid schedule (Pages 3-7 of Section 00.11.00) and the WAD summary page (Attachment 2), consisting of the original signed Standard Form 1442 “Solicitation, Offer, and Award” providing a cost for all line items in the corresponding bid schedule and acknowledgement of all amendments to the solicitation. Proposed costs must be entered for all items of the bid schedule and the supplemental bid schedule. The bid schedule, supplemental bid schedule and WAD summary page (Attachment 2) shall be submitted in excel format.

Offerors shall also submit a detailed cost proposal to cover all items described in the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) of the Scope of Work. The WAD summary page shall include a summary page (a template has been provided as Attachment 8) breaking out the cost elements for each line item in the Bid Schedule to include: 1) Direct labor hours; 2) Direct labor costs; 3) Direct materials and supplies; 4) Subcontractor costs; 5) Subcontractor Labor Hours; 6) Travel; 7) Other direct costs; 8) Overhead; 9) General and administrative costs; and 10) Fee. The offeror shall also submit any assumptions and detailed backup information for each WBS item including, but not limited to labor hours, labor rates and specific disciplines performing the task, specific subcontract costs and services provided under the subcontract, a breakdown of material quantities and unit rates, and travel costs upon which the cost proposal is based.

11.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED IN VOLUME 1

12.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED IN VOLUME 2

In accordance with FAR 16.301-3(a)(3), a cost reimbursement contract may be used only when the contractor’s accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract or order. In order to be considered for award, each offeror shall provide a recent adequacy determination (no older than 4 years than the due date of proposals) from either a Federal Government Cognizant Audit Agency, or any commercially recognized auditing or accounting firm, stating they the offeror’s accounting system is adequate. The adequacy letter shall also include a statement confirming that no changes have taken place since the issuance of the determination.

SECTION 01 10 00 - SCOPE OF WORK

SCOPE OF WORK

1. DESCRIPTION OF WORK

The Contractor shall be responsible for executing the task order by: conducting the required environmental restoration services for the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on behalf of the U.S. Army Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) office; addressing any and all environmental, scheduling, and regulatory issues;

and assuming contractual liability and responsibility for the achievement of the objectives for the 1200 Area Soil and Bedrock Removal at the former Kansas Army Ammunition Plant (KSAAP), Parsons, Kansas. Figures 1 and 2 show the locations of KSAAP and the 1200 Area, respectively. The Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, standard industry practices, and fulfill the requirements of the Scope of Work (SOW) in a manner that is consistent with any applicable orders or permits, all existing cleanup agreements or guidance for the KSAAP and relevant Department of Defense (DOD) and USACE policy for the duration of the task order.

The Contractor shall perform all necessary environmental remediation work as required to meet the requirements of this SOW. The SOW is being conducted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) with regulatory coordination through the Kansas Department of Health and the Environment (KDHE) Bureau of Environmental Remediation (BER) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region VII.

The documentation provided in Attachment 1 represents the most recent and appropriate documentation available for the tasks identified in this SOW. Documents include the following:

Attachment 1a - Final Remedial Action Report, 1200 Area, 2011

Attachment 1b - Final Corrective Measures Implementation Report, 1200 Area Settling Lagoons/Effluent Ditches and Pond 3 Corrective Measures Design/SLERA Investigations and Removal Action, 2013

Attachment 1c - Draft-Final Pre-Design Investigation Work Summary, 1200 Area Pilot Studies for Contaminated Groundwater, 2016

Attachment 1d - Building 1206 Construction Drawings (various years)

Attachment 1e - Barricade 1234 Drawing, 1989

The objectives of the 1200 Area work are to:

Excavate soil at five locations: Area 1, adjacent to former Building 1233; Area 2, within the former North Settling Lagoon (NSL); Areas 3 and 4, adjacent to Building 1206, and; Area 5 within the Southern Settling Lagoon (SSL) (Figures 3 through 9)

Excavate bedrock (limestone) from Areas 4 and 5 (Figures 3, 6, 7 and 9)

Dispose of contaminated soil and bedrock off-site

Backfill to pre-existing grades with clean off-site borrow and restore site

Monitor groundwater for changes in chromium concentrations for 8 (eight) consecutive Quarters

1.1. Site Description

The former KSAAP is located in Labette County, Kansas, approximately 20 miles north of the Oklahoma state line and 30 miles west of the Missouri state line, near the town of Parsons (Figure 1). The 1200 Area (formerly the Casing Rework Area) refers to approximately 49 acres in the south-central portion of KSAAP (Figure 2).

Chromium contamination at the site resulted from casing rework of 105-millimeter cartridges, which started in Building 1206 in 1953. Part of this rework process involved cleaning the casings with a chromic acid solution, the first such reported use of this chemical in the 1200 Area. At present, the site is mostly grasslands with five brick and block buildings, a system of engineered drainage ditches, a system of stem lines, and a storm water retention pond at the southeastern end of the site (Pond #1).

Two earthen-type, unlined lagoons (SSL and NSL) located within the 1200 Area (Figure 3) were used for settling and storage of wastewater containing chromic acid solution and rinse water, respectively, generated from casing reworking. Discovery of the former settling lagoons, which were filled in and abandoned after casing rework operations ceased, occurred during implementation of the Soils Corrective Measures, after the 2004 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Assessment and 2005 RCRA Facility Investigation.

Wastewater was reportedly discharged directly into the SSL without treatment. Water from the SSL did not drain off-site, but instead either evaporated or was allowed to infiltrate into the ground (see Figure 10, Conceptual Site Model). Detergent used in the casing rework process was discharged to a ditch located between the two lagoons to a point where it entered a drainage ditch on the west side of the lagoons. The rinse water was conveyed via a third ditch to the NSL, then treated with sodium metabisulfite prior to entry into a 30-minute retention pond and finally treated with lime prior to discharge into a ditch on the west side of the lagoons. The drainage ditch west of the lagoons conveyed the detergent and treated rinse water to Pond #3 located to the southwest of the 1200 Area.

In 2007, USACE performed a Remedial Action which included excavation and off-site disposal of soil contaminated with hexavalent chromium and polychlorinated biphenyls. In November 2011 USACE began the Corrective Measures Implementation (CMI) which consisted of investigation trenches and subsequent excavation of 100 by 250 feet of SSL material down to the top of the weathered limestone. The depth of excavation ranged from approximately 5 to 6 feet below ground surface (bgs).

1.2. Cleanup Criteria

The soil clean-up criteria for KSAAP are for non-residential use and are presented in the Final Corrective Measures Decision (CMD) (EPA, 2006). Hexavalent chromium is expected to be the only contaminant exceeding the clean-up criteria at the 1200 Area. Therefore, hexavalent chromium results from confirmation sampling performed as part of the soil removal will be compared to the clean-up criteria of 64 milligrams per kilogram and additional soil removal shall be performed as needed.

There are no clean-up criteria for bedrock at KSAAP. Bedrock excavation volumes are based on findings documented in the Draft Final Pre-Design Investigation Work Summary (USACE, 2016). Confirmation sampling of bedrock will not be conducted under this contract; however, samples of bedrock will be collected by USACE or one of its contractors immediately after excavation. Spacing for bedrock floor and wall samples will be similar to spacing for soil confirmation samples described in this SOW.

2. Key Personnel

Project Manager: The Project Manager (PM) shall be competent, experienced and knowledgeable in the field of hazardous and toxic waste cleanup, environmental laws and regulations, and the type of activities in the SOW. The PM is responsible to assure the goals of the Contract are attained in a manner consistent with the Contractor's approved Accident Prevention Plan (APP), Contractor Quality Control Plan (CQCP) and all State, Federal and local laws and regulations. The PM will coordinate with the Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) and the Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) to assure that all activities are performed in a safe manner. The PM shall be employed by Contractor and be the primary point of contact.

Field Supervisor: The Field Supervisor is responsible to ensure compliance with the requirements identified in the SOW and the CQCP. The Field Supervisor, or their designated representative, shall be physically present at the project site whenever work is in progress. Their responsibilities shall include:

Inspection of materials and equipment received on-site to assure compliance with contract requirements

Inspection of all field activities

Supervision of Quality Control (QC) testing as required by the contract documents

Completing daily QC reports

Sampling, Analysis, and Chemical…