Amendment_6.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)

30-105-04 EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Provide answers to requests for clarifications. Please note the updated copy of the Service Contract Act Wage Determination. Reissue Amendment 0005 due to clerical error (the only change to Amendment 0005 is block 2 of the SF30).

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1 7

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 26-Feb-2016

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15C. DATE SIGNED 15B. 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 W912P4-15-R-0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Dec-2015

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 X is extended, 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

26-Feb-2016

CODE

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

USACE, BUFFALO

1776 NIAGARA STREET

BUFFALO NY 14207-3199

W912P4 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODE CODE

EMAIL: TEL:

W912P4-15-R-0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

ROUND 7 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Reference Amendment #2, Question/Answer 21:

Question: Based on the Answer provided, please clarify whether Offerors should include all elements of Section C.5.10 Demobilization in both the technical approach and pricing, or just those associated with seasonal demobilization.

Answer: For the purposes of Sample Project #1, Offerors should include only the costs associated with seasonal demobilization.

2. Amendment 4, question 28 asked if all material had to be disposed of at an NRC licensed facility and the answer was yes, it should be disposed of at an NRC licensed facility. Does NRC licensed include agreement state licensed?

Answer: Yes.

3. Amendment 4, question 28 asked if all material had to be disposed of at an NRC licensed facility and the answer was yes, it should be disposed of at an NRC licensed facility. Does this mean that the actual cell the waste is disposed in must be NRC licensed or does the material just have to be received at a facility with an NRC license and can then be disposed based upon the requirements of the license which could include disposal in a RCRA subtitle C landfill?

Answer: For the purposes of Sample Project #1, Offerors should assume that the cell the waste is disposed in must be licensed. However, Offerors are encouraged to explain proposed alternative disposal options in their conceptual approach.

4. Amendment 5 – Q&A 27 and 36 – Relating to air handler and vapor phase carbon unit maintenance – WBS 331XX07 breaks down into routine and non-routine maintenance. What is considered non-routine maintenance? Is there a frequency to replace major parts that the contractor shall assume that the USACE can provide like replacing a blower motor or louver motor. The TiGG manual and the SOPs provided primarily focuses on inspection of the units only

Answer: Non-routine maintenance includes breakdowns or mechanical failures of the air handler components that require repair and/or replacement. There is no specified frequency for replacement of major components.

5. Amendment 5 – Q&A – 5 and 26 – Responses mention no carbon change outs required?

What does the contractor price for WBS item 331XX0790 which is titled “Material Processing Building Air Handler Carbon Change-outs”

Answer: For the purposes of Sample Project #1, USACE has specified that no carbon change outs are required. Therefore, the price for that WBS item should be left blank.

6. Amendment 5 – Q&A – 31 – What is the average and maximum depth the contractor shall assume in determining trench safety and benching/sloping factors.

Answer: As stated in the PWS for Sample Project #1 (Attachment 7.3), Offerors should assume that Trench 99 is located in the vicinity of the upper trench area and has similar characteristics to the pre-remediation conditions of Trench 2.

7. Amendment 5 – Q&A – 25 – However, the revised PWS from Amendment 5 doesn’t mention backup generator associated with MPB. Is the contractor required to price in supply, install and testing of the backup generator as part of the Sample Project Trench 99 costs?

Answer: The PWS for Sample Project 1 specifies the installation of necessary support facilities and infrastructure as part of the work activities. Installation of the emergency back-up generator is considered to be necessary infrastructure to support the project work.

8. Amendment 5, Question and Answer #53 makes it clear that we can’t mobilize to the site until ALL work plans are accepted by USACE. The RFP outlines a work plan review process that will require approximately 1 year or more for the work plans to be accepted. Please confirm that when you say we can’t mobilize until work plans are accepted that this means we can’t start any infrastructure work such as setup of the on-site lab so that we can get the ELAP-certification process started.

Answer: Confirmed.

9. Reference Amendment #5, Q&As 15 and 38 – The guidelines for scheduling the Sample

Project require the Offerors to follow Unified Facilities Guide Specifications Section

01032001.00 10. Within this Specification section 3.3.2.1 – it states that less than 2 percent of all non-procurement activities shall have Original Durations greater than 20 work days or 30 calendar days.

Question: The WBS provided includes more than 2 percent of activities that could be more than 30 days in duration (i.e., Level of Effort activities). For instance, WBS 331XX02 has 11 elements that will span the time on site for Sample Problem Trench 99 remediation. Other WBS elements with Level of Effort activities include 331XX507, 331XX0791, 331XX0792, 3311920, 331XX1922, and 331XX22. Can the Offeror show these WBS activities as Level of Effort spanning the duration of site work?

Answer: For the purposes of preparing a cost loaded schedule for Sample Problem #1, the Level of Effort (LOE) can be used for the activities noted. However, once award is made the Successful Offeror will follow the Unified Facilities Guide Specification Section (UFGS) Section 01 32 01.00 10, §3.3.2.1.

10. Reference Amendment #5, Q&A 13

Question: The government extended the due date to 08 March 2016. However, a NLT time was not provided in the answer or the SF30. Is it implied close of business at 5:00pm EST?

Answer: The response date and time is clarified herein to be March 08, 2016, 3:00 p.m.

Eastern.

11. Reference Amendment #5, Q&A 63

Question: Would the government consider making the subject information available to all offerors prior to award so as to avoid allowing any single offeror (or offeror team) to have unequal access to information which could provide an unfair competitive advantage?

Answer: The request has been considered and that information will not be provided because the only information being generated by the current site O&M contractor are monthly perimeter monitoring results from the existing air monitoring stations and TLDs. All current data have not detected any significant levels of airborne radioactive materials or exposure above background at the site perimeter.

12. Reference the USACE response to Question 1, Amendment # U0004 Consistent with C5.2.1.5 we will prepare and submit under TO # 1, the NCS Program Plan including implementing procedures. We understand that USACE will accept this Plan prior to the Contractor’s commencement of tasks involving fissile material including design of new structures, systems or processes (C5.1.2.5(d)).

It is our understanding then that designs (such as wastewater treatment system and others) would be completed by the Contractor under Sample Project #1 after the Contractor’s approaches for site remediation, infrastructure, security, etc have been developed and reviewed and accepted by USACE and stakeholders under TO #1.

Since the preparation of detailed NCS evaluations and calculations requires complete, approved designs and work plans, we understand that the detailed NCS evaluations and calculations and other NCS supporting documents (i.e., CAAS placement, hazard identification documents, etc.) would be performed under Sample Project #1, not under TO #1.

Please indicate whether or not our understanding is correct.

If our assumption is incorrect, will the USACE provide copies of the previously developed NCS Assessments/Evaluations and Calculations developed by the previous contractor and approved by the USACE and NRC? It is our understanding that one of the Offerors has these plans in their possession and therefore has an unfair advantage with respect to the time and cost required to update them under this contract. If USACE cannot provide the previously approved NCS Assessments/Evaluations and Calculations, will USACE provide a plug number for all Offerors to use in estimating the cost of NCS Assessments/Evaluations and Calculations under TO #1?

Answer:

The NCS evaluations and calculations are necessary as a part of development of the work plans. USACE expects that all designs, including the wastewater treatment plant and others, will be completed during development of the work plans. Therefore, the cost and time associated with those NCS evaluations, calculations, and design should be included in Task Order 001. The technical approach previously employed on this project, and the related work plans, were ultimately determined to be inadequate by the Government. USACE expects that work plans developed under this solicitation must be prepared independent of any previous work plans, and should reflect the Offeror's proposed unique technical approach. See also the answer to Question 13 below.

13. Reference the USACE response to Question 1, Amendment U0004.

It is recognized that prior SLDA site contractors are members of competing teams for the present contract. Under the prior work, detailed NCS evaluations and calculations were completed which have not been provided to all Offerors.

In order to avoid an unfair competitive advantage to the teams with those former site contractors, we respectfully request that the USACE evaluation of Offeror’s time/cost estimates to perform detailed NCS evaluations and calculations please consider that all Offerors have not been given the opportunity to review the prior detailed evaluations and calculations.

Answer: Past detailed NCS evaluations and calculations will not be provided to Offerors.

Offerors need to consider the specific work methods/methodologies they propose and to evaluate how a safe and productive working environment will be maintained. Each proposal will be evaluated on the merits of its specific methodologies and safety.

14. Reference to Amendment 5.

The FedBizOpps announcement for this Amendment indicated this was Amendment 5 yet box 2 of the SF 30 indicates Amendment No. U0004. Please clarify.

Answer: Box 2 of the SF 30 in Amendment No. 5 should read as 0005 and not U0004. It will be corrected and reissued as part of this Amendment No. 0006.

15. Reference Amendment #5, Q&A #58

We assume the imported fill quantity for Sample Project #1 site restoration should match the contaminated soil/debris off-site disposal waste volume of 5,500 BCY. Assuming this is accurate, we expect the off-site fill quantity should be closer to 7,000 LCY than the 10,400 LCY stated in the Government’s response to Question #58. Does USACE want bidders to price the full 10,400 LCY, or is it acceptable to change the imported fill quantity to match our assumed technical approach?

Please clarify the sample frequency for the imported fill. Specification 02 61 13, Section

3.7.1 directs sample frequency for fill at 1 sample per 100 CY. For imported fill, are bidders permitted to reduce sample frequency to the PADEP-approved sample frequency from previous projects of one initial sample and one additional sample per every 2,500 LCY?

Answer: Offerors may not alter the quantities in the bid schedule for Sample Project #1 except for those identified in Amendment 5, Question 15. UFGS Section 02 61 13, §3.7.1 only pertains to sampling of “excavated soils / fill”, i.e., potentially contaminated soils and fill excavated at the site, and does not apply to imported fill. Sampling requirements for imported fill and topsoil are specified in UFGS 02 61 13, §2.2.2.

16. Reference Amendment #5, Q&A #32

Amendment 5, Q&A #32 states that DBA is provided for occupational codes not listed in SCA wage determinations. Please confirm that DBA rates apply to construction labor for this project.

Answer: The only wage determination applicable to Task Order 0001 and the Sample Task Order is the Service Contract Act Wage Determination WD 15-4235 (Rev.-2). If certain occupational codes are not listed in this Wage Determination, please refer to Solicitation Clause 52.222-41.

17. Reference Amendment #3, Q&A #4

It is in the Government’s best interest that the Contractor not assume risk, liability, and additional expense for the pre-existing or legacy contamination at SDLA that rightfully belongs to Site Owner and responsible party, BWXT. Given the possibility that the Contractor could be subject to third party claims related to damages resulting from BWXT’s contamination of the SDLA, the Contractor and its insurance carrier should be protected by having the right to seek recovery from the responsible party, BWXT, any damages paid to third parties. Therefore, we request that the USACE delete the waiver of subrogation with regards to BWXT.

Answer: The language will not be deleted or modified.

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 26-Feb-2016 12:00 PM to 08-Mar-2016 03:00 PM.

(End of Summary of Changes)