W912QR22R0022 Amendment 0003.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

Solicitation W912QR22R0022 is amended as follow s:

1) Schedule A Rates are amended to reflect the proper number of estimated hours and to remove the "Risk Assessor" position incorrectly added via Amendment 0002.

2) Section M, Paragraph 6.0.1 is amended to replace "Risk Assessor" position w ith "Human Health Risk Assessor" and "Ecological Risk Assessor" for key personnel.

3) All other solicitation terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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 W912QR22R0022

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Dec-2021

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

12-Jan-2022

CODE

U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, LOUISVILLE

600 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PLACE

ROOM 821

LOUISVILLE KY 40202-2239

W912QR 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

The following have been modified:

SCHEDULE A - RATES

SCHEDULE A – YEAR 1

Discipline Proposed Hourly Rate (fully burdened in $US) for Year 1

Estimated # of Hours Total Per Discipline

Program Manager 500 Project Manager 5000 Archaeologist 60 Certified Health Physicist (CHP) 80 Architectural Historian 48 Biologist / Limnologist 36 Environmental Researcher 1000 Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH, ABIH)

Certified Safety Professional (CSP) 150 Corporate Safety and Health Manager 300 Chemist Sr. 300 Chemist Jr. 1000 Cost Estimator Sr. 640 Construction Manager 2000 Ecologist 50 Ecological Risk Assessor 5000 Environmental Engineer Sr. 400 Environmental Engineer Jr. 1000 Environmental Scientist Sr. 400 Environmental Technician 1500 Environmental Law Specialist 30 EOD Technician I 200 EOD Technician II 100 EOD Technician III 50 Hydrogeologist Sr. 1600 Geographer 20 Geologist Sr. 500 Geologist Jr. 1000 Human Health Risk Assessor 5000 Geophysicist 200 UXO Safety Officer (UXOSO) 300 Senior UXO Supervisor (SUXOS) 800 UXO Quality Control Specialist

(UXOQCS)

Project Administrator 1500 Quality Control Manager 500 Regulatory Specialist 320 Surveyor 500

Technical / Specification Writer 1600 TOTAL (Year 1): $

NOTE 1: Offerors must complete all items on the Schedule A.

NOTE 2: The hourly rates proposed on the Schedule A-YEAR 1 are considered fully burdened rates that shall remain in effect for the first year of the contract. The proposed rates shall become binding upon award of the base contract. These rates must be adhered to throughout the first year of the contract. Adherence to these rates will be reviewed through the submittal of supporting documentation for each task order.

NOTE 3: The hours provided above are estimated for cost evaluation purposes only and do not constitute a guarantee that any amount of work above the minimum guarantee will be awarded under this contract.

NOTE 4: Total Evaluated Price MUST be calculated by the offeror. Offerors are instructed to multiply the proposed rate by the number of estimated hours (provided by the Government) for each discipline for each contract year and enter the total amount in the space provided below.

SCHEDULE A – YEAR 2

Discipline Proposed Hourly Rate (fully burdened in $US) for Year 2

Estimated # of Hours Total Per Discipline

Program Manager 500 Project Manager 5000 Archaeologist 60 Certified Health Physicist (CHP) 80 Architectural Historian 48 Biologist / Limnologist 36 Environmental Researcher 1000 Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH, ABIH)

Certified Safety Professional (CSP) 150 Corporate Safety and Health Manager 300 Chemist Sr. 300 Chemist Jr. 1000 Cost Estimator Sr. 640 Construction Manager 2000 Ecologist 50 Ecological Risk Assessor 5000 Environmental Engineer Sr. 400 Environmental Engineer Jr. 1000 Environmental Scientist Sr. 400 Environmental Technician 1500 Environmental Law Specialist 30 EOD Technician I 200 EOD Technician II 100 EOD Technician III 50 Hydrogeologist Sr. 1600 Geographer 20 Geologist Sr. 500 Geologist Jr. 1000 Human Health Risk Assessor 5000 Geophysicist 200 UXO Safety Officer (UXOSO) 300 Senior UXO Supervisor (SUXOS) 800 UXO Quality Control Specialist

(UXOQCS)

Project Administrator 1500 Quality Control Manager 500 Regulatory Specialist 320 Surveyor 500 Technical / Specification Writer 1600

TOTAL (Year 2): $

NOTE 1: Offerors must complete all items on the Schedule A.

NOTE 2: The hourly rates proposed on the Schedule A-YEAR 2 are considered fully burdened rates that shall remain in effect for the second year of the contract. The proposed rates shall become binding upon award of the base contract. These rates must be adhered to throughout the second year of the contract. Adherence to these rates will be reviewed through the submittal of supporting documentation for each task order.

NOTE 3: The hours provided above are estimated for cost evaluation purposes only and do not constitute a guarantee that any amount of work above the minimum guarantee will be awarded under this contract.

NOTE 4: Total Evaluated Price MUST be calculated by the offeror. Offerors are instructed to multiply the proposed rate by the number of estimated hours (provided by the Government) for each discipline for each contract year and enter the total amount in the

SCHEDULE A – YEAR 3

burdened in $US) for Year 3

Estimated # of Hours Total Per Discipline

Program Manager 500 Project Manager 5000 Archaeologist 60 Certified Health Physicist (CHP) 80 Architectural Historian 48 Biologist / Limnologist 36 Environmental Researcher 1000 Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH, ABIH)

Certified Safety Professional (CSP) 150 Corporate Safety and Health Manager 300 Chemist Sr. 300 Chemist Jr. 1000 Cost Estimator Sr. 640 Construction Manager 2000 Ecologist 50 Ecological Risk Assessor 5000 Environmental Engineer Sr. 400 Environmental Engineer Jr. 1000 Environmental Scientist Sr. 400 Environmental Technician 1500 Environmental Law Specialist 30 EOD Technician I 200 EOD Technician II 100 EOD Technician III 50 Hydrogeologist Sr. 1600 Geographer 20 Geologist Sr. 500 Geologist Jr. 1000 Human Health Risk Assessor 5000 Geophysicist 200 UXO Safety Officer (UXOSO) 300 Senior UXO Supervisor (SUXOS) 800 UXO Quality Control Specialist

(UXOQCS)

Project Administrator 1500 Quality Control Manager 500 Regulatory Specialist 320 Surveyor 500 Technical / Specification Writer 1600

TOTAL (Year 3): $

NOTE 1: Offerors must complete all items on the Schedule A.

NOTE 2: The hourly rates proposed on the Schedule A-YEAR 3 are considered fully burdened rates that shall remain in effect for the third year of the contract. The proposed rates shall become binding upon award of the base contract. These rates must be adhered to throughout the third year of the contract. Adherence to these rates will be reviewed through the submittal of supporting documentation for each task order.

NOTE 3: The hours provided above are estimated for cost evaluation purposes only and do not constitute a guarantee that any amount

NOTE 4: Total Evaluated Price MUST be calculated by the offeror. Offerors are instructed to multiply the proposed rate by the number of estimated hours (provided by the Government) for each discipline for each contract year and enter the total amount in the space provided below.

SCHEDULE A – YEAR 4

Discipline Proposed Hourly Rate (fully burdened in $US) for Year 4

Estimated # of Hours Total Per Discipline

Program Manager 500 Project Manager 5000 Archaeologist 60 Certified Health Physicist (CHP) 80 Architectural Historian 48 Biologist / Limnologist 36 Environmental Researcher 1000 Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH, ABIH)

Certified Safety Professional (CSP) 150 Corporate Safety and Health Manager 300 Chemist Sr. 300 Chemist Jr. 1000 Cost Estimator Sr. 640 Construction Manager 2000 Ecologist 50 Ecological Risk Assessor 5000 Environmental Engineer Sr. 400 Environmental Engineer Jr. 1000 Environmental Scientist Sr. 400 Environmental Technician 1500 Environmental Law Specialist 30 EOD Technician I 200 EOD Technician II 100 EOD Technician III 50 Hydrogeologist Sr. 1600 Geographer 20 Geologist Sr. 500 Geologist Jr. 1000 Human Health Risk Assessor 5000 Geophysicist 200 UXO Safety Officer (UXOSO) 300 Senior UXO Supervisor (SUXOS) 800 UXO Quality Control Specialist

(UXOQCS)

Project Administrator 1500 Quality Control Manager 500 Regulatory Specialist 320 Surveyor 500 Technical / Specification Writer 1600

TOTAL (Year 4): $

NOTE 1: Offerors must complete all items on the Schedule A.

NOTE 2: The hourly rates proposed on the Schedule A-YEAR 4 are considered fully burdened rates that shall remain in effect for the fourth year of the contract. The proposed rates shall become binding upon award of the base contract. These rates must be adhered to throughout the fourth year of the contract. Adherence to these rates will be reviewed through the submittal of supporting documentation for each task order.

NOTE 3: The hours provided above are estimated for cost evaluation purposes only and do not constitute a guarantee that any amount of work above the minimum guarantee will be awarded under this contract.

NOTE 4: Total Evaluated Price MUST be calculated by the offeror. Offerors are instructed to multiply the proposed rate by the number of estimated hours (provided by the Government) for each discipline for each contract year and enter the total amount in the

SCHEDULE A – YEAR 5

burdened in $US) for Year 5

Estimated # of Hours Total Per Discipline

Program Manager 500 Project Manager 5000 Archaeologist 60 Certified Health Physicist (CHP) 80 Architectural Historian 48 Biologist / Limnologist 36 Environmental Researcher 1000 Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH, ABIH)

Certified Safety Professional (CSP) 150 Corporate Safety and Health Manager 300 Chemist Sr. 300 Chemist Jr. 1000 Cost Estimator Sr. 640 Construction Manager 2000 Ecologist 50 Ecological Risk Assessor 5000 Environmental Engineer Sr. 400 Environmental Engineer Jr. 1000 Environmental Scientist Sr. 400 Environmental Technician 1500 Environmental Law Specialist 30 EOD Technician I 200 EOD Technician II 100 EOD Technician III 50 Hydrogeologist Sr. 1600 Geographer 20 Geologist Sr. 500 Geologist Jr. 1000 Human Health Risk Assessor 5000 Geophysicist 200 UXO Safety Officer (UXOSO) 300 Senior UXO Supervisor (SUXOS) 800 UXO Quality Control Specialist

(UXOQCS)

Project Administrator 1500 Quality Control Manager 500 Regulatory Specialist 320 Surveyor 500 Technical / Specification Writer 1600

TOTAL (Year 5): $

NOTE 1: Offerors must complete all items on the Schedule A.

NOTE 2: The hourly rates proposed on the Schedule A-YEAR 5 are considered fully burdened rates that shall remain in effect for the fifth year of the contract. The proposed rates shall become binding upon award of the base contract. These rates must be adhered to throughout the fifth year of the contract. Adherence to these rates will be reviewed through the submittal of supporting documentation for each task order.

NOTE 3: The hours provided above are estimated for cost evaluation purposes only and do not constitute a guarantee that any amount

NOTE 4: Total Evaluated Price MUST be calculated by the offeror. Offerors are instructed to multiply the proposed rate by the number of estimated hours (provided by the Government) for each discipline for each contract year and enter the total amount in the

TOTAL EVALUATED PRICE (YEARS 1-5): $

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

EVALUATION CRITERIA

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Overview

The intent of this solicitation is to select up to seven (7) small business contractors to establish Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOC) for Environmental Restoration Services (ERSC) under NAICS Code 5629l0 within the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division (LRD) mission boundaries. The task orders awarded off of these IDIQ contracts shall contain fixed price line items.

The basis of award is the Tradeoff Process. The Contracting Officer will award up to seven (7) IDIQ contracts to the responsible offerors whom the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority determines conform to the solicitation, are fair and reasonable and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offers or to reject all offers.

Offerors are required to submit a proposal made up of Technical (Key Personnel, Past Performance, and Price and Proforma. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified below. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (factor or sub-factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information.

2. Proposal Evaluation Process.

A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers, and possibly a major User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the Tradeoff Process.

The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and cost/technical trade-off analysis.

Proposal Compliance Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete and that both a technical and price proposal were received.

Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the proposals against the RFP requirements. Some factors will be rated using an adjectival-based system. Past Performance will be rated based on recency/relevancy and confidence.

Price Evaluation: The SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical evaluation.

Cost/Technical Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are complete, the Contracting Officer/SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority (SSA) will then consider all factors to select up to seven (7) proposals offering the best value to the Government.

3. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

l. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in relative order of importance. Factor I Technical (Key Personnel Resumes) is considered more important than Factor II Past Performance. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined are considered greater than cost or price. Offerors--are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. The Government may make award of conforming proposals without discussions, if deemed to be within the best interest of the Government.

2. Volume I Factor I Technical (Key Personnel Resumes)

Tab A Key Personnel Resumes

3. Volume I- Factor II Past Performance

4. Volume II - Price and Pro Forma Information

Tab A Standard Form 33 and Price Breakout Schedule Tab B Joint Venture Agreements Tab C Proof of Financial Ability (i.e. Bonding) Tab D Pre-A ward Information

1st

2nd

Not Rated

4. Combined Technical/Risk Assessment Ratings

Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

Technical Assessment Ratings Adjectival Rating Definition

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

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

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

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

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

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is un-awardable.

Unacceptable

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definition Substantial Confidence Based on the recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence Based on the recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available, or meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

5. Definitions

I. Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

2. Strength. An merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

3. Significant Strength.

exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

4. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See

FAR 15.001.

5. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

6. Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear

(e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

7. Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(l ).

8. Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating from sources where the information is from other than formal rating systems such as

6.0 Volume I- Factor I -Technical (Key Personnel Resumes)

6.0. l Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall provide the resumes of the key personnel who will be utilized to execute the work that may be awarded under this contract. The resumes shall not exceed 2 pages or l double sided page each. The resumes shall clearly display proposed job title, experience record shall include the title, specific duties, responsibilities, and assignments within at least the last five years, and years of experience with this firm and with other firms in the industry. If the individual submitted for any of the key personnel roles listed below worked on any of the projects submitted for Factor II, Past Performance (see 7.1 below), provide a summary of duties the individual performed for that project. Additionally, if any individual submitted for a key personnel role listed below has experience on projects that include the following project characteristics, note that experience in detail in the resume:

• Experience working for the Corps of Engineers.

• HTRW investigation and/or remediation within the LRD states {IL, IN, KY, MI, OH, WV, PA, VA, NC, MN, NY, and TN).

• Investigation and/or remediation in complex hydrogeologic settings.

• Investigation and/or remediation of soils and/or groundwater contaminated with PFAS.

• Investigation and/or remediation of soil and/or groundwater contaminated with chlorinated solvents.

• Investigation and/or remediation of soils and/or groundwater contaminated with explosives constituents.

The offeror shall provide resumes for the following key personnel. These individuals shall either be employees of the Prime Contractor proposed individual is not an employee of the offeror, the proposal must include a letter of commitment or teaming agreement from the firms employing these individuals committing these technical resources to the contract team for the duration of the contract. No key personnel may be dual-hatted.

• Program Manager - Must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as Program Manager.

• Project Managers (resumes for 2 individuals are required) - Each must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as Project Manager.

• Hydrogeologist: Must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as a Hydrogeologist and have a PE or PG license.

• Geologist (resumes for 2 individuals are required): Both resumes must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as a Geologist and at least one must have a PG license.

• Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH): Must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as a Certified

Industrial Hygienist and have a CIH certification.

• Environmental Scientist (resumes for 2 individuals are required degree in an environment science field of study and a minimum of 5 years of experience as an Environmental Scientist.

• Human Health Risk Assessor: Must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as a Risk Assessor (RA) in CERCLA human health risk assessment.

• Ecological Risk Assessor: Must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as a Risk Assessor (RA) in ecological risk assessment.

• Environmental Engineer (resumes for 2 individuals are required): Both resumes must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as an Environmental Engineer and at least 1 must have a PE license.

• Chemist: must demonstrate a minimum 5 years of experience as a chemist.

*NOTE: The proposed personnel must be used in performance of all task orders issued under any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Substitution of any Key Personnel after award requires prior approval of the Contracting Officer, and the qualifications of any replacement must be equivalent to or exceed the qualifications of the individual being substituted. For all positions listed above, submit one key personnel resume unless the resumes of two individuals are required. Do not submit more than the number of resumes required. If additional resumes beyond the number required are submitted for any position, the SSEB will only evaluate the first resume (or in the case of positions requiring two individuals, the first two resumes) in the proposal. No surplus resume will be evaluated.

6.0.2 Evaluation Criteria:

to the of contaminated soil and groundwater. Offerors who propose key personnel that exceed the minimum requirements of their positions will be rated more favorably than those offerors who submit key personnel that merely meet the minimum requirements. The Key Personnel any key unawardable. The SSEB may give additional consideration for key personnel that exceed the minimum qualifications or that demonstrate experience with the project characteristics listed in Paragraph 6.0.1. Submission Requirements.

7.0 Volume I -Factor II -Past Performance

7.1 Submission Requirements:

Provide summary descriptions ofup to five (5) projects substantially complete or completed by the Prime Contractor within 10 years of the solicitation issue date which, are similar to the scope of this ERSC with a primary emphasis on remediation of contaminated soil and groundwater.

The project descriptions provided, at a minimum, shall address the following:

• Project name, location

• Brief description reflecting capabilities described in the scope of this ERSC.

• Percentage of work performed by prime contractor

• Contract type (firmed fixed price, etc.)

• Customer (by name and type, i.e. government, private sector)

• Percent of project completion (if not completed) and site closure status with regulator(s).

• The award cost vs. actual (or cost-to-date)

• Proposed schedule vs. actual schedule

• Customer POCs for reference (2), including agency, phone, and email, if known.

The prime contractor must have self-performed at least 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred with its own employees to be considered similar. A project is defined as a single contract or task order. A project can also be defined as multiple task orders supporting one installation/facility or customer. All projects submitted must have key elements of the work be at least 75% complete. If the project has multiple task orders, all task orders associated with the project must have key elements of the work be at least 75% complete.

Projects with key elements of the work less than 75% complete may be considered less relevant. Percent complete is based upon actual work, not percentage billed. The percentage complete must be clearly stated for each project submitted. The project descriptions shall not exceed 3 pages per project (or a page and a half double sided).

Provide two references for each of the five (5) projects presented in response to this factor. Also include any ratings, letters, awards, etc.

which support past performance on these projects. A sample Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is attached for your convenience. If used, the Past Performance Questionnaire must be submitted by the offeror with the proposal submission and not sent directly to the agency from the reference

The SSEB will assign a confidence rating to each offeror based on the degree of successful performance of all recent and relevant projects identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 6.1. Offerors that demonstrate successful experience with the following project characteristics may be rated more favorably:

• Experience working for the Corps of Engineers.

• HTRW investigation and/or remediation within the LRD states (IL, IN, KY, Ml, OH, WV, PA, VA, NC, MN, NY, and TN).

• Investigation and/or remediation in complex hydrogeologic settings.

• Investigation and/or remediation of soils and/or groundwater contaminated with PFAS.

• Investigation and/or remediation of soil and/or groundwater contaminated with chlorinated solvents.

• Investigation and/or remediation of soils and/or groundwater contaminated with explosives constituents.

The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction.

The Government may review past performance information retrieved through CPARS. The Government may also elect not to verify the references provided. The Government may also use other tools such as CPARS, Dun & Bradstreet, etc. or any other relevant performance.

7.2 Evaluation Criteria:

7.2.1 The SSEB will first evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 5.1 above. By using the criteria identified above, the SSEB will determine how relevant a past project is when compared to the scope, size and magnitude of effort, and complexities of the solicited project. A relevancy rating will be assigned to each submitted project using the Past Performance Relevancy Ratings (Table 1), above.

7.2.2 The SSEB will next review how well the offeror performed on those projects. The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. In addition to the information submitted by the offeror, the Government may review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including similar projects other than those submitted by the offeror. The Government will, at a minimum, review past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifier numbers identified in the offeror s proposal. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

7.2.3 The SSEB will assign a final, overall Performance Confidence rating, using the ratings in the Performance Confidence Assessment (Table 2) above. The SSEB will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate this information into the performance confidence assessment. The past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the offeror s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

The SSEB will review the information submitted for each firm and will consider this information when assigning an overall confidence rating. The design firm will not receive its own confidence rating. NOTE: The Government may discuss all past performance information for the firm with the prime contractor.

8.0 Volume 2 - Price and Proforma Information (Submit in a separate envelope).

8.1 Tab A - Standard Form 33 and Proposal Price Breakout Schedule.

8.1.1 Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall complete and submit Standard Form 33 and Schedule A - Rates. Both of these forms are included within this solicitation.

8.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The total evaluated price will be determined by multiplying the hourly rate proposed for each discipline by the estimated number of hours for the entire MATOC found in the Schedule A, and then adding the total estimated prices for all disciplines together. The total evaluated price and the proposed rates will be evaluated by the SSEB and the Contracting Officer/SSA for fair and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis.

8.2 Tab B-Joint Venture, Mentor-Protege, and Teaming Agreements

8.2.1 Submission Requirements:

Small business offerors (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, etc.) submitting a proposal as a Joint Venture or Mentor-Protege Joint Venture shall submit evidence from the Offeror's SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist. Joint Venture agreements and approved 8(a) Mentor-Protege agreements must be submitted with the proposal.

Additionally, offerors that include key personnel from a teaming partner must submit the teaming agreement with their proposal.

8.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Joint Venture Agreements and Mentor-Protege agreements must comply with the relevant regulations in Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

8.3 Tab C- Proof of Financial Ability

8.3.1 Submission Requirements:

Financial Capability. Submit Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities). Include the name, address and telephone number of firm's banking institution.

8.3.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

W912QR22R0022

8.4 Tab D - Pre-Award Information

8.4. l Submission Requirements:

A. The offeror shall submit one completed copy of Section K, Representations and Certification.

B. The offeror shall submit the following information:

a) Number of years the firm has been in business

b) Name, address and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references

c) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value

8.4.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

(End of Summary of Changes)