W912DR-16-R-0009.pdf

CODE

(Hour)

PAGE(S)

until local time

X

A X B X C

D

EX

X G F 108 - 114

115 - 126 X H 127 - 133 patricia.l.morrow@usace.army.mil

RATING PAGE OF PAGES

7. ISSUED BY

(Date)

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

Previous Edition is Unusable 33-134 STANDARD FORM 33 (REV. 9-97)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

1 133

(If other than Item 7)

15A. NAME 16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO

AND

ADDRESS

SIGN OFFER (Type or print)

OF

OFFEROR

AMENDMENT NO. DATE

15B. TELEPHONE NO (Include area code) 17. SIGNATURE15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS

IS DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE - ENTER

SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

18. OFFER DATE

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED ORDER

UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

2. CONTRACT NO.

W912DR 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

See Item 7

9. Sealed offers in original and 5 copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if handcarried, in the depository located in

CAUTION - LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All offers are subject to all terms and

10 S. Howard Street conditions contained in this solicitation.

10. FOR INFORMATION

CALL:

A. NAME (NO COLLECT CALLS)

PATRICIA L MORROW 410-962-3463

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOLICITATION/ CONTRACT FORM

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/ COSTS

2 - 9

X I CONTRACT CLAUSES

DESCRIPTION/ SPECS./ WORK STATEMENT X

PACKAGING AND MARKING

10 - 36 J LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

X K

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND

OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA 39 X

SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror) 40 - 42 X M

L INSTRS., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

is inserted by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232-8)

14. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments

AMENDMENT NO. DATE

to the SOLICITATION for offerors and related documents numbered and dated):

FACILITY

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

X

(X) SEC. DESCRIPTION (X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S)

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) 27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 28. AWARD DATE

EMAIL:TEL: (Signature of Contracting Officer)

CODE CODE

B. TELEPHONE (Include area code) C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED 20. AMOUNT 21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION:

10 U.S.C. 2304(c)( ) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)( ) (4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7) CODE 25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

43 - 67

PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES

U.S.ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE

10 S. HOWARD STREET

ROOM 7000

BALTIMORE MD 21201 410-962-2197

FAX:

TEL:

FAX:

TEL:

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

SOLICITATION

68 - 107

6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NO.5. DATE ISSUED

18 Jul 2016

4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

[ X ]

3. SOLICITATION NO.

W912DR-16-R-0009

Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0001 1 Job Base Environmental Support Ft. Belvoir

FFP

Contractor shall provide the labor, materials, facilities, and equipment necessary to perform all work identified on a task order basis and in accordance with the Performance Work Statement in Section C and the rates established on the Price Schedule.

FOB: Destination

MAX

NET AMT

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0002 UNDEFINED Job OPTION Base Environmental Support Ft. Belvoir

FFP

Contractor shall provide the labor, materials, facilities, and equipment necessary to perform all work identified on a task order basis and in accordance with the Performance Work Statement in Section C and the rates established on the Price

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0003 UNDEFINED Job OPTION Base Environmental Support Ft. Belvoir

FFP

Contractor shall provide the labor, materials, facilities, and equipment necessary to perform all work identified on a task order basis and in accordance with the Performance Work Statement in Section C and the rates established on the Price

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0004 UNDEFINED Job OPTION Base Environmental Support Ft. Belvoir

FFP

Contractor shall provide the labor, materials, facilities, and equipment necessary to perform all work identified on a task order basis and in accordance with the Performance Work Statement in Section C and the rates established on the Price

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0005 UNDEFINED Job OPTION Base Environmental Support Ft. Belvoir

FFP

Contractor shall provide the labor, materials, facilities, and equipment necessary to perform all work identified on a task order basis and in accordance with the Performance Work Statement in Section C and the rates established on the Price

PRICE SCHEDULE

# Discipline Base

Year 01 Option Year 01

Option Year 02

Option Year 03

Option Year 04

1 Principal

2 Sr. Project Manager

3 Mid Level Project Manager

4 Jr. Project Manager

5 Sr. Engineer

6 Mid Level Engineer

7 Jr. Engineer

8 Sr. Environmental Engineer

9 Mid Level Environmental

10 Jr. Environmental

11 Sr. Hydraulic Engineer

12 Hydraulic Engineer

13 Sr. Geotechnical

14 Geotechnical Engineer

15 Civil Engineer

16 Registered Surveyor

17 Survey Crew (3‐man)

18 Engineering Technician

19 Laborer

20 Cost Estimator

21 Cost Accountant

22 Budget Analyst

23 Industrial Hygienist (Certified)

24 Industrial Hygienist (Industrial)

25 Sr. Geologist

26 Jr. Geologist

27 Sr. Geophysicist

28 Jr. Geophysicist

29 Sr. Scientist

30 Mid Level Scientist

31 Jr. Scientist

32 Sr. Environmental Scientist/ Sr. Wetlands Scientist

33 Mid Level Environmental

34 Jr. Environmental

35 Sr. Biologist

36 Mid Level Biologist

37 Jr. Biologist

38 Soil Scientist

39 Sr. Ecologist

40 Ecologist

41 Faunal Analyst

42 Sr. Hydrogeologist

43 Jr. Hydrogeologist

44 Geomorphologist

45 Sr. Chemist

46 Mid Level Chemist

47 Jr. Chemist

48 Certified Health Physicist

49 Regulatory Specialist

50 Urban Regional Planner

51 Sr. Archeologist

52 Mid‐Level Archeologist

53 Jr. Archeologist

54 Sr. Architectural Historian

55 Historian

56 Cultural Resource Conservationist

57 Laboratory Archeologist

58 Sr. UXO Supervisor

(SUXOS)

59 UXO Safety Officer

(UXOSO)

60 UXO Quality Control Specialist (UXOQCS)

61 UXO Technician III

62 UXO Technician II

63 UXO Technician I

64 UXO Sweep Personnel

65 UXO Project Manager

66 Quality Control Specialist

67 Site Safety Office

68 Illustrator/ Draftsperson

69 Computer Scientist/ Operator

70 Cartographer/ GIS Analyst

71 CADD/ GIS Technician

72 Technician (General)

73 Computer Technician

74 Administrative Assistant

75 Secretary

76 Clerical

Offerors are to submit their labor rates for each of the ordering periods at the time of proposal submission.

All proposed pricing will be binding and will be the maximum rates that the Offeror will use for any firm fixed price task orders issued against the SATOC, within the base year and four option years of the contract. Lower rates may be offered at the task order level.

Home Office:

Description Base Year 01

Option Year 01

Option Year 02

Option Year 03

Option Year 04

Overhead Rate

G&A Rate

Field Office:

Description Base Year 01

Option Year 01

Option Year 02

Option Year 03

Option Year 04

Overhead Rate

G&A Rate

Additional Rates/ Markups:

Home Office:

Description Base Year 01

Option Year 01

Option Year 02

Option Year 03

Option Year 04

Material

Subcontractor

CONTRACT MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CONTRACT VALUE

The minimum quantity and contract value for all orders issued against this contract shall not be less than the minimum quantity and contract value stated in the following table. The maximum quantity and contract value for all orders issued against this contract shall not exceed the maximum quantity and contract value stated in the following table.

MINIMUM

QUANTITY

MINIMUM

AMOUNT

MAXIMUM

QUANTITY

MAXIMUM

AMOUNT

1.00 $15,000.00 15,000,000.00 $15,000,000.00

DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND ORDER VALUE

The minimum quantity and order value for each Delivery/Task Order issued shall not be less than the minimum quantity and order value stated in the following table. The maximum quantity and order value for each Delivery/Task Order issued shall not exceed the maximum quantity and order value stated in the following table.

MINIMUM

QUANTITY

MINIMUM

AMOUNT

MAXIMUM

QUANTITY

MAXIMUM

1.00 $15,000.00 15,000,000.00 $15,000,000.00

CLIN DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CLIN ORDER VALUE

The minimum quantity and order value for the given Delivery/Task Order issued for this CLIN shall not be less than the minimum quantity and order value stated in the following table. The maximum quantity and order value for the given Delivery/Task Order issued for this CLIN shall not exceed the maximum quantity and order value stated in the following table.

CLIN

MINIMUM

QUANTITY

MINIMUM

AMOUNT

MAXIMUM

QUANTITY

MAXIMUM

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

QASP

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Ft. Belvoir SATOC Ft. Belvoir, Virginia

W912DR-16-D-00xx

Prepared By

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District

Contracting Division City Crescent Building, Room 7000

10 South Howard Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 – Subject Matter Experts Table 2 – Evaluation Areas & Ratings Criteria Table 3 – Key Milestones/Deliverables by Evaluation Areas Table 4 – Specific Evaluation Criteria for Established Key Milestones/Deliverables

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment A: Quality Assurance Monitoring Form Attachment B: Quality Assurance Report Attachment C: Corrective Action Form Attachment D-5: On-Site Safety/Operations Quality Assurance Form Attachment D-6: Chemistry Quality Assurance Form (Data Submittal)

LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS

COR Contracting Officer’s Representative KO Contracting Officer PM Project Manager PBA Performance Based Acquisition PMP Project Management Plan POC Point of Contact PWS Performance Work Statement QAMF Quality Assurance Monitoring Form QAR Quality Assurance Report QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan SME Subject Matter Experts USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1 Introduction. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) sets forth the procedures and guidance that the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will use in evaluating the technical and quality performance of the Contractor in accordance with the terms and conditions of the scope of work (SOW) for Contract No. W912DR-16- D-00xx. A copy of the signed final plan will be furnished to the Contractor so that the Contractor will be aware of the methods that the COR will use in evaluating performance of this contract, and will be uploaded to CORMs.

1.2 Purpose. The purpose of the QASP is to ensure that the performance of specific activities and the completion of project milestones are accomplished in accordance with all requirements set forth in the PWS and outlined in the Project Management Plan (PMP). This QASP describes the mechanism for documenting noteworthy accomplishments or discrepancies for work performed by the Contractor. Information generated from COR’s surveillance activities will directly feed into performance discussions with the Contractor. The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with performance metrics set forth in the contract documents, the Army receives the quality of services called for in the contract, and the Army only pays for acceptable services received.

The QASP is intended to accomplish the following:

Define the role and responsibilities of participating Army officials.

Define the key milestones, deliverables, and standards that will be assessed.

Describe the surveillance methodology that will be employed by the Army in assessing the Contractor’s performance.

Describe the surveillance documentation process and provide copies of the forms that the Army will use in evaluating the Contractor’s performance.

Outline quality assurance procedures to be employed by the Government during performance of this task order.

Define Evaluation Areas, including Quality, Schedule, Cost Control (NA), Management, Small Business, Regulatory Compliance, and other areas (as applicable).

Define Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory performance standards for key milestones, deliverables, and standards.

Ensure clarity on recent changes to the formulation of contractor evaluations, from an overall/cumulative rating to a recommend/do not recommend.

Outline corrective action procedures.

Describe payment procedures.

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ARMY OFFICIALS

2.1 Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer (KO) has overall responsibility for overseeing the Contractor’s performance. The KO is responsible for the day-to-day monitoring of the Contractor’s performance in the areas of contract compliance, and contract administration; reviewing the COR’s assessment of the Contractor’s performance;

and resolving all differences between the COR’s assessment and the Contractor’s assessment of performance. It is the KO that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance. The KO for this contract is _____ the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Baltimore District, Phone Number (410-962-xxxx), ________@usace.army.mil. Questions for the KO should be directed to the assigned USACE Contracting Specialist, ________ (410-962-xxxx), ______@usace.army.mil.

2.2 Contracting Officer Representative (COR). The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is responsible for technical administration of the project and assures proper Army surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR is responsible for monitoring, assessing, recording, and reporting on the technical performance of the Contractor on a day-to-day basis. The COR for this contract is ________ at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Baltimore District, 410-962-xxxx, ______@usace.army.mil. Questions for the COR should be directed to the assigned USACE Project Manager, _____ at 410-962-xxxx, _____@usace.army.mil.

2.3 Technical Expertise and Subject Matter Experts. The KO and COR may call upon the technical expertise of other Army Officials and subject matter experts (SME) as required. These Army Officials and SMEs may be called upon to review technical documents and products generated by the Contractor. For this contract, the following Army Officials and SMEs have been identified:

TABLE 1 – Subject Matter Experts

TBD

If additional Army Officials and SMEs are identified as work progresses, the QASP will be modified to capture this information.

3.0 METHODS FOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

3.1 Evaluation Areas. The Contractor’s performance will be evaluated by assessing the key milestones and deliverables above according to the standards of Quality, Schedule, Cost Control (if applicable), Small Business, and Regulatory Compliance. Other Evaluation Areas can be included at the discretion of the COR and Project Manager (PM), and will be provided to the Contractor in a revised QASP prior to its finalization. Each Evaluation Area is rated as Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory.

3.2 Evaluation Areas and Ratings Criteria.

TABLE 2 – Evaluation Areas & Ratings Criteria

EVALUATION AREAS & EXAMPLE INDICATORS

Quality Product performance relative to contract’s performance parameters

Performance in terms of contract’s quality objectives

Use quantitative indicators wherever possible

Contractor’s management of the quality control program

Quality of the work or service

Schedule Timeliness of the Contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements

Contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule, that contributes to or affects the scheduled variance

Adverse actions such as the assessment of liquidated damages or issuance of Cure Notices, Show Cause, and Delinquency Notices are indicators of problems which may have resulted in variance to the contract schedule and should, therefore, be noted in the evaluation

Adequacy of Initial Progress Schedule

Submission of Required Documentation

Adherence to Approved Schedule

Submission of Updated & Revised Progress Schedules

Resolution of Delays

Cost Control (NA‐

FIRM‐FIXED PRICE)

Does the contractor keep within the total estimated cost (what is the relationship of the negotiated costs and budgeted costs to actuals?)

Did the contractor do anything innovative that resulted in a cost savings?

Were billings current, accurate and complete?

Are the contractor’s budgetary internal controls adequate?

Management Integration and coordination of activity

Problem identification

Corrective action plans

Reasonable and cooperative behavior

Customer satisfaction

Subcontract management

Program management

Management of key personnel

Small Business Compliance with terms and conditions for Small Business participation

Achievement of Small Business subcontracting

Good faith effort to meet Small Business subcontracting goals

Please indicate if small businesses were or were not used in each effort

Regulatory Compliance

Compliance with regulations and codes

Financial

Environmental

Labor o Correction of Noted Deficiencies o Compliance with Labor Laws and Regulations with Specific

Attention to the Davis‐Bacon Act and o EEO Requirements o Payrolls Properly Completed and Submitted

Safety o Adequacy of Safety Plan o Correction of Noted Deficiencies o Implementation of Safety Plan

Other Reporting requirements in the contract

EVALUATION AREA RATINGS DEFINITIONS*

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’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. To justify an exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. 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.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’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 was effective. To justify a very good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub‐element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. To justify a satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

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

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. To justify marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recover is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub‐ element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. To justify an unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone would constitute an unsatisfactory rating. An unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety or environmental deficiency report or letter).

*The guidelines provided for issuing ratings are subjective in nature, and these ratings will be supported by the weight of evidence documented during the government's surveillance efforts.

3.3 Performance Assessment Process. If a deliverable is rated as being unsatisfactory for Quality or Regulatory Compliance at the time that the approved PWS deadline for the milestone expires, the Contractor may receive an unsatisfactory rating for Schedule, unless there is an Army approved delay that extends the PWS deliverable/milestone. This will only take place during the rating period, and will not necessarily influence future/later ratings.

3.3.1 Army Approved Delays. At the discretion of the COR, the performance standard of Schedule outlined in Table 4, may not be monitored due to Army-Approved delays. QAMFs will track and report this based on Contractor monthly reports to the COR.

3.4 Recommendation. In lieu of an overall rating, the Contractor will either be recommended/not recommended for similar future requirements.

3.5 Key Milestones/Deliverables to be assessed. The following milestones and associated deliverables will be evaluated in accordance with this QASP:

3.5.1 Key Milestones

COR acceptance of the Final PMP

COR acceptance of the Final Work Plan

COR acceptance of Final Corrective Action Plan

3.5.2 Example Key Deliverables

Project Management Plan

Final Work Plan

Final Building Removal/Disposal Memo

Final Corrective Action Plan Report

Monthly Status Reports

3.5.3 Monitoring Method

100% Inspection: All project milestones and deliverables will be evaluated through 100% inspection by onsite inspection or document review. The USACE Project Manager will document performance for each completed milestone or deliverable prior to payment, as described in Section 5.0.

Periodic Inspection: At the USACE Project Manager’s discretion, periodic inspections will be conducted to evaluate progress toward key milestones and deliverables. This will include QA Inspections (safety, geophysics, chemical data packages, etc.) by a government representative. The USACE Project Manager may also complete a periodic progress inspection if he/she believes that deficiencies exist that must be addressed prior to milestone or deliverable completion. While corrective action or re-performance will be required if necessary, the Contractor will not be financially penalized for unacceptable performance recorded in periodic progress reports, provided that final performance evaluation of the milestone or deliverable is deemed acceptable.

Customer Feedback: Contractor performance feedback will be obtained through periodic inquiries by the USACE Project Manager with project stakeholders. The purpose of these inquiries would be to supplement the other forms of evaluation and to also provide the Contractor with constructive criticism and/or recognition for the project deliverables or milestones completed. Customer feedback received will be thoroughly validated to ensure it relates to the requirements of the PWS and will be used in a prudent manner by the COR. Customer feedback will also be solicited in the form of a concurrence letter by the Contractor from appropriate stakeholders for key deliverables.

3.5.4 Additional Surveillance Activities

Additional Government surveillance activities may include, but are not limited to, the following:

Review and approval of meeting minutes from Kickoff Meetings, TPP Sessions, RAB (if required) or Public Involvement Meetings, etc.

Review of Daily Reports

Review of data deliverables

Oversight of field work activities

Review of uploaded electronic deliverables

Review of the Contractor’s quality control documentation.

Review of the Contractor’s safety records

Since this is a PBA, it is possible to have a twelve-month or longer period where no milestones/deliverables are met. When this is the case, the quality of Contractor performance will be evaluated using additional surveillance activities, including but not limited to, Contractor monthly reports, government oversight, and review of documentation.

3.5.5 Indicators and Documentation

COR acceptance Meeting minutes Memos Worksheets Completion of QAMFs Correspondence (letters, email)

Table 3 – Example Key Milestones/Deliverables by Evaluation Areas Milestone/Deliverable* Qualit y Schedul e

Manageme nt

Regulatory Complianc e (incl.

Safety)

Small Business

Cost Control (if applicable

Kickoff Meeting Notes X Draft Project Management Plan

(PMP)

X N/A

FINAL PMP X X X N/A

Draft Quality Control Plan (QCP) X N/A Final QCP X X X N/A DRAFT Work Plans X N/A FINAL Work Plans X X X X N/A Final Building Removal and Disposal Report

X X X X N/A

Demobilization Memo X N/A Draft Closure Report X N/A Final Closure Report X X X X N/A Contaminates Soil Removal Manifests (options)

X

Contaminated Water Removal Manifests (options)

X

Draft Corrective Action Plan X Final (Corrective Action Plan X X X X N/A

* Includes Key Milestones and Key Deliverables from PWS and Payment Milestones from PMP, dated Month Year.

3.6 Performance Standards. The Contractor’s performance will be evaluated by assessing the key milestones and deliverables above according to the standards of Quality, Schedule, Management, Regulatory Compliance (which includes Safety); Cost Control (NA) and Small Business. In addition, the Contractor’s performance will be evaluated for the standard of Safety during any fieldwork. For each of these performance standards, the COR will assign one of five ratings of the Contractor’s performance: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 – Specific Evaluation Criteria for Established Key Milestones/Deliverables Performance Standard

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory

Quality Draft Final and Final deliverables are of excellent quality, approved as submitted, or with no substantive comments limited to grammar, spelling, or terminology.

Draft Final deliverables are of high quality and comments are mostly minor.

Final deliverables are approved after one (1) round of Army comments on the Draft Final through

Draft Final deliverables are of acceptable quality with only a few number of comments identifying major weaknesses.

Final deliverables are approved after

Draft Final deliverables are of poor quality with a significant number of comments identifying major weaknesses or deficiencies.

Final deliverables require more than two (2)

Draft Final deliverables are of very poor quality and are rejected for resubmittal without comment. Final deliverables did not comply with contract requirements, or one or more document versions required more than three (3) rounds of Army comments

Standard

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory

Army audit finds that the data collect and/or the work performed exceeds the requirement of the PWS. No deficiencies noted acceptance of response to comments table and backcheck of Final report against original comments.

No further revisions are required.

Army audit of work does not identify any deficiencies that compromise the quality of the data collected or work performed.

Two (2) rounds of Army comments on Draft Final.

No further revisions are required.

work identifies deficiencies that do not compromise the quality of the data collected or work performed, and can be corrected.

rounds of Army comments on Draft Final before being approved.

(e.g., changes are required to the Final document due to inadequate incorporation of comments).

Army audit of work identifies deficiencies that compromise the quality of the data collected or work performed, but were corrected.

before being approved.

work identifies deficiencies that compromise the quality of the data collected or work performed, and cannot be corrected.

Schedule Contractor Achieves milestone more than 90 days ahead of schedule, per criteria established in the PWS and this QASP.

For PMP, excellent rating is achievement of milestone 10 days ahead of schedule.

Contractor Achieves milestone less than 90 days but more than 30 days ahead of schedule, per criteria established in the PWS and this QASP.

For PMP very good rating is achievement of milestone 5 days ahead of schedule.

Contractor achieves milestone according to the schedule, per criteria established in

For PMP satisfactory rating is achievement of milestone on schedule.

Contractor achieves milestone more than 30 days but less than 90 days behind schedule (unless the COR notes Army delay), per criteria established in marginal rating is achievement of milestone 10 days behind schedule.

Contractor achieves milestone more than 90 days behind schedule (unless the COR notes Army delay), per criteria established in the PWS and this

QASP.

unsatisfactory rating is achievement of milestone 15 days behind schedule.

Management All personnel proposed by the contractor

All personnel proposed by the contractor

All personnel proposed by the contractor

All personnel proposed by the contractor

All personnel proposed by the contractor were

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory were assigned to the project.

Some personnel were substituted by higher qualified individuals.

Zero (0) instances of resource management issues creating a negative impact to the activity.

were assigned to the project.

Some personnel were substituted by higher

No more than one (1) instances of resource management issues creating a negative impact to the activity.

were assigned to the project.

Some personnel were substituted by equally qualified individuals.

Informal poor performance feedback on conduct of personnel is provided by the COR but are corrected.

two (2) instances of resource management issues creating a negative impact to the activity.

were assigned to the project.

Some personnel were substituted by equally

Formal letter of poor performance feedback on conduct of personnel is provided by the COR but are corrected.

three (3) instances of resource management issues creating a negative impact to the activity.

assigned to the project. Some personnel were substituted by lesser qualified individuals.

Written request from USACE requesting removal of assigned personnel for poor performance or notification of poor performance is provided by the COR and is not corrected.

More than three (3) instances of resource management issues creating a negative impact to the activity.

Regulatory Compliance (includes Safety)

Contractor obtains concurrence on deliverables from the

USEPA

Region III and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and all Army stakeholders to include

USACE,

USAEC and Ft. Belvoir.

This concurrence is obtained independently

Contractor obtains concurrence on deliverables from the

USEPA

Region III and the Virginia Department of Environmenta l Quality and all Army stakeholders to include

USACE,

USAEC and Ft. Belvoir.

This

Contractor obtains concurrence on deliverables from the

USEPA

Region III and the Virginia Department of Environmenta l Quality and all Army stakeholders to include

USACE,

USAEC and Ft. Belvoir.

This

Contractor obtains concurrence on deliverables from the

USEPA

Region III and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and all Army stakeholders to include

USACE,

USAEC and Ft. Belvoir.

This concurrence is obtained with a significant

Contractor does not obtain concurrence on deliverables from the USEPA Region III and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and all Army stakeholders to include USACE, USAEC and Ft.

Belvoir.

More than three (3) serious safety deficiencies are reported during QA inspection of field activities, or a serious safety

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory with little to no involvement and coordination required by the Government.

No significant safety deficiencies are reported during QA inspection of fieldwork. No lost time accidents or injuries are recorded during the fieldwork.

concurrence is obtained independentl y with limited involvement and coordination required by the Government.

No more than one (1) serious safety deficiencies are reported during QA inspection of fieldwork. If any serious safety deficiency is noted during the project, appropriate investigation, corrective action, implementati on, and written verification of the corrective action are provided to the Army.

No lost time accidents or injuries are recorded during the fieldwork.

concurrence is obtained with a moderate level of involvement and coordination required by the Government.

No more than two (2) serious safety deficiencies are reported during QA inspection of fieldwork. If any serious safety deficiency is noted during the project, appropriate investigation, corrective action, implementati on, and written verification of the corrective action are provided to the Army.

No lost time accidents or injuries are recorded during the fieldwork.

level of involvement and coordination required by the Government.

No more than three (3) serious safety deficiencies are reported during QA inspection of fieldwork. If any serious safety deficiency is noted during the project, appropriate investigation, corrective action, implementatio n, and written verification of the corrective action are provided to the Army. No more than one lost time accident or injury is recorded during the fieldwork.

deficiency is reported but not properly investigated and corrected, or two or more lost time accidents or injuries is recorded during field activities.

Small Business

Cost Control N/A N/A

N/A N/A

N/A

4.0 SURVEILLANCE DOCUMENTATION

4.1 Quality Assurance Monitoring Form. The COR or designee will use the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form (QAMF) (Attachment A) to record evaluation of the Contractor’s performance for each payment milestone or final deliverable in accordance with the methodology described in Section 3.0 and Section 4.0. The USACE Project Manager must substantiate, through narratives on the form, all Exceptional and Unacceptable ratings. Performance at the acceptable level is expected from the Contractor. At a minimum, the evaluation form will indicate actual and scheduled delivery times and number of reviews required to achieve the final product. Other input to surveillance includes Quality Assurance Reports (QARs) (Attachment B) generated at various phases of the project. QARs should be completed by individuals completing review of project deliverables or oversight of field work events.

The USACE Project Manager will forward copies of all completed QAMFs to the USACE COR within 7 days of performing the inspection. The USACE Project Manager will forward all completed quality assurance monitoring forms to Ft. Belvoir and Contractor within 14 days.

4.2 Corrective Action Process. When a key milestone/deliverable receives a marginal or unacceptable rating, the Contractor will explain, within 15 days, in writing to both the USACE COR and USACE Project Manager why performance was marginal or unacceptable, how performance will be returned to acceptable levels, and how recurrence of the problem will be prevented in the future. The Contractor shall use the corrective action form as part of this process (Attachment C). The USACE COR will review the proposed corrective action with Ft. Belvoir and USACE Project Manager, and Ft. Belvoir POC (Ms. Sybille Vega), as necessary, to determine if it will be accepted.

4.3 KO and COR Roles in Surveillance Process. The USACE Project Manager will provide the COR and KO with copies of all completed QAMFs. When appropriate, the COR and/or KO may investigate further to determine if all the facts and circumstances surrounding the event were considered in the USACE Project Manager opinions outlined on the form. The COR and/or KO will immediately discuss any unacceptable rating with the Contractor’s Program Manager to assure that corrective action is promptly initiated. At the end of the contract performance period, the USACE Project Manager will prepare a written report for the COR and KO summarizing the overall results of the surveillance of the Contractor’s performance during the contract. This report will become part of the formal QA documentation. The USACE Project Manager will maintain a complete QA file. This file will contain copies of all performance evaluation forms and any other related documentation. The USACE Project Manager will forward these records through the COR and to the KO at termination or completion of the contract.

4.4 Technical Quality Assurance Monitoring. In general, all work will be evaluated in terms of how well the requirements of the task order are satisfied, the extent to which the work performed follows the approach found in the contractor’s technical proposal and/or implements the decision of Technical Project Planning, and clarity of documentation. At the discretion of the COR or the Contracting Officer or Specialist, other government officials approved by the Contracting Officer or Specialist may be asked to evaluate a particular deliverable or set of deliverables. The results of all Technical Quality Assurance Monitoring will be documented using a Technical Review Form. Technical Quality Assurance Monitoring Documentation will document technical criteria evaluated.

Relevant forms are included in Attachment D and will be updated as needed.

5.0 PAYMENT

5.1 Acceptable Performance. The Contractor will also be required to perform a milestone presentation per the PWS. At the discretion of the COR, these milestone presentations may be conducted as part of the next regularly scheduled Project Meeting. Full payment for a milestone will be provided upon verification of overall acceptable performance as indicated on the QAMF. The contractor should provide an invoice to the USACE Project Manager after receipt of the QAMF from the USACE indicating acceptable performance. If a QAMF is not provided to the Contractor within 14 days of completion of the milestone the Contractor will submit an invoice.

5.2 Unsatisfactory Performance. If a milestone or deliverable receives an unsatisfactory rating for either the Quality or Regulatory Compliance performance standard, re-performance is required until the deliverable receives an acceptable rating. This re-performance is required regardless of cost or schedule constraints that may result from the unsatisfactory performance, unless the KO has opted to terminate the contract.

SCOPE OF WORK

SCOPE OF WORK

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

Place of Performance Fort Belvoir, Virginia and Satellite Facilities

Period of Performance:

Base Year and 4 Option Years

1.0 General: The purpose of this contract is to provide a full range of environmental compliance, environmental restoration, environmental conservation activities, pollution prevention and information management activities. The environmental compliance and base support includes, but not limited to, air pollution regulations, testing of water and laboratory services, solid waste handling, disposal regulations, and recycling programs, hazardous waste handling and disposal, compliance with Federal, state and/or local Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know regulations, compliance with Federal, state and/or local water quality regulations, VPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer permit requirements, VPDES Industrial Stormwater Major Permit requirements, lead-based paint investigations and abatement, asbestos surveys, master spill plan, federal and state petroleum regulations, indoor air quality monitoring and corrective actions, and Installation Sustainability and environmental management systems. The environmental restoration requirements include, but not limited to, development of site specific work plans with accompanying sub-plans, sampling and testing of soil, conduct waste investigations, prepare remedial action decision documents, corrective measures studies, corrective measures action plans, remedial action plans, perform risk assessments (both human and ecological), conduct remedial action activities at sites, remediation of contaminated soils, demolition, removal, treatment, transport and/or disposal of man-made structures, remediation of contaminated groundwater, topographic, structural and geophysical surveys, hydrogeological testing and data analysis, chemical sampling, treatment, and/or disposal of containerized wastes, construction of containments around hazardous and regulated waste sites, operation and maintenance of remediation facilities, laboratory services, community education and public affairs activities, geotechnical investigations, base sustainment, restoration and modernization support. The environmental conservation requirements include, but not limited to, compliance with Federal, state and local wetlands permitting, permit compliance and monitoring requirements, wetlands, streams and ecological and natural resource surveys, threatened and endangered species surveys, archeological reconnaissance and Phase I and Phase II surveys, and perform Phase III data recovery, perform wetland mitigations restorations, National Environmental Policy Act documentation, a full array of cultural resource compliance services, and historic preservation plans. Also, to perform a wide range of pollution prevention work that includes, but not limited to, pollution prevention plans, implementation of repairs, upgrades, and improvements, and pollution prevention training programs. In addition, to provide for data and information management services.

The contractor shall furnish all materials, equipment, supplies, personnel, and all other services required to perform the work outlined in this statement of work and as specifically outlined in the individual task orders.

Task orders may use performance-based work statements (PWS) or prescriptive scope of work (SOW). If a PWS is utilized, then the following should be taken into account by the contractor.

A PWS structures all aspects of an acquisition around the purpose of the work to be performed and does not dictate how the work is to be accomplished. It is written to ensure that contractors are given the freedom to determine how to meet the Government’s performance objectives and provides for payment only when the results meet or exceed these objectives. It maximizes contractor control of work processes and allows for innovation in approaching various work requirements. A PWS emphasizes performance that can be contractually defined so that the results of the contractor’s effort can be measured in terms of technical and quality achievement, schedule progress, or cost performance. The goal of Performance-Based Acquisition (PBA) is to:

a. Save money by reducing costs from elimination of unnecessary effort, through innovation by the contractor, and also by reducing Government surveillance.

b. Enable Government to shift its emphasis from processes to outputs.

c. Hold contractors accountable for the end results.

d. Ensure that contractors are given the freedom to determine how to meet Government’s performance objectives.

The Contract will be administered by the Baltimore District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

2.0 Scope of Work: The time frame and specific procedure for each item of work will be described in the individual task order. The description of stated herein provides a general understanding of the contractor functions to be performed. Individual task orders will contain the specific requirements. Technical requirements described herein in no way limit the activities that may be required under the terms of this contract.

2.1 Environmental Compliance: The Contractor shall be performing a wide range of environmental compliance work. The Contractor shall be capable, providing fully qualified staff for the following program areas: drinking water, wastewater, Environmental Management System, Municipal Separate Storm Sewer, Sediment and Erosion Control and Stormwater, Recycling, Solid Waste, Air Quality, Hazardous Waste, EPCRA, Spill Response, NEPA, and Petroleum Management.

2.1.1 Air

This Scope of Work presents the requirements for the Contractor to provide Clean Air Act (CAA) compliance support to the Fort Belvoir Environmental and Natural Resource Division (ENRD) to insure compliance with Federal, State, and/or local air pollution regulations. These requirements includes, but are not limited to, preparation of air permits, monitoring air emissions, maintaining air emissions inventories, inspecting permitted facilities, providing ODS compliance assistance, quarterly ODS training and audits, RONA preparation, quarterly compliance training and audits, new Title V Operating permit implementation and support, laboratory and testing support services, assistance with new and/or innovative methods of tracking/managing/reporting compliance date and the implementing of corrective actions to reduce or minimize air emissions.

2.1.2 MS4

a. This Scope of Work presents the requirements for the Contractor to provide Clean Water Act (CWA) Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) compliance support to the Fort Belvoir Environmental and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) to insure compliance with all Federal, State, and/or local VPDES and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) regulations/requirements. These requirements include but are not limited to, education articles for publication in the Fort Belvoir Eagle, staff education displays for stormwater outreach events, to revise/update an existing EXCEL stormwater structure inventory database that includes data for approximately 8,0000 stormwater structures (manholes, culverts, outfalls, stormwater management facilities, inlets, outlets, etc.), to conduct annual outfall reconnaissance inventory for a minimum of fifty (50) outfalls, track and document illicit discharges and conduct illicit discharge investigation (tracking investigations may include but not limited to TV inspections of stormwater pipes, dye testing, smoke testing, visual inspections, stormwater analytical sampling and analysis with VELAP certified laboratories, etc.), update illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) plan, to perform and document stormwater management (SWM) plan reviews, to perform and document erosion and sediment control (ESC) project plan reviews, to perform and document stormwater management (SWM) and erosion and sediment control (ESC) construction site inspections to insure compliance with approved SWM and ESC project plans, develop and prove ESC and SWM designs for minor construction and repair projects, perform and document stormwater pollution prevention inspections of facilities that are required under the “General Permit for Discharges of Storm water from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems” (MS4 Permit #VAR040093), analyze findings from stormwater pollution prevention inspection and provide and document recommendations for corrective action, to complete any revisions/updates as required to the Fort Belvoir Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan that are required under the “General Permit for Discharges of Storm water from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems” (MS4 Permit #VAR040093) and to reflect inspections/findings and any resulting corrective actions, to conduct annual permit SWPPP and IDDE training for required personnel as required by “General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems” (MS4 Permit #VAR040093), to revise and update an existing MS4 stormwater compliance document repository database with permit documentation (including but not limited to, inspections, TMDL data, related data from outfalls, construction plans, VSMP permits, etc.), to utilize GIS to compute drainage area for MS4 permitted outfalls and to revise/update an existing Chesapeake Bay TMDL ACCESS database that includes data records on approximately 300 permanent stormwater management facilities (structural BMPs) throughout the installation.

b. Stormwater MS4 maintenance activities will include, but are not limited to the following: to perform and document inspections of stormwater management (SWM) treatment facilities (up to 300 facilities), prepare and provide corrective action plan on inspection findings, update and revise GIS inventory/database, develop and provide concept level retrofit plans for SWM facilities requiring retrofits under the Chesapeake Bay TMDL program.

c. The Contractor shall be familiar with the Commonwealth of Virginia (the state’s) “General Permit for Discharges of Storm water from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems” (MS4 Permit #VAR040093) and the Commonwealth of Virginia (the state’s) permitting process and reporting of data (i.e. preparation of the MS4 annual report to VADEQ.