J A.pdf

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

CONTROL NO NAE13 01 -

· PROJECT/EQUIPMENT: Sole Source IDIQ Contract Remediation New Bedford Superfund Site

AUTHORITY: 10 U.S.C.2304 (c )(1) as implement by FAR 6.302-1 & DFARS 206.302-1 AMOUNT: $45,000,000.00 NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO

Prepared By: Ellen Iorio 978-318-8433

TITLE DATE

Proiect Manaoer 16-Mav-2013 NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO

Contracting Officer Sheila M. Winston-Vincuilla 978-318-8159

TITLE DATE

Same as 13 & 14 in J&A (5) District ContractinQ Chief 16-Mav-2013 NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO

Technical (6) Ellen Iorio 978-318-8433

TITLE DATE

Proiect Manaaer 16-Mav-2013 NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO

Requirements (6) GarvMorin 978-318-8232

TITLE DATE

Acting Chief, Military/Environmental Project Mgmt Br. 16-May-2013

SIGNATURES ARE REQUIRED BELOW:

I De>ou•tv for Small Business (7)

I o,n;ort Manager* (8) no PM, use NIA of Counsel

Competition Advocate

Counsel l)~laJ Competition _

Justification and Approval for

Other Than Full and Open Competition New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site

New Bedford, Massachusetts

1. Contracting Activity: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), New England District, 696 Virginia Road, Concord MA 01742. The New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site (NBHSS) is located in New Bedford, Fairhaven and Acushnet, Massachusetts.

2. Description of Action: Approval is being sought for acquisition of a Sole Source Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) construction contract with a $45,000,000 capacity and one and one half year duration (six month base & two six month options).

This is so that the incumbent contractor, Jacobs Engineering (Jacobs), can complete one additional dredge season while a new Site Specific Remedial Action Contract (RAC) is put in place. The schedule for award of the new RAC, along with the first Task Order, is January 2014. It will take a minimum often months for the new RAC Contractor to procure equipment, complete work plans, and mobilize to the site. The cunent contract expired on May 27, 2013 and it does not have sufficient capacity to allow for dredging to be continued until the new RAC is in place. The District timely obtained approval for this RAC as a $240 million ten-year SATOC and planned to issue the solicitation in October 2012. However, in October 2012 an unanticipated settlement between the EPA and a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) occmTed which will add significant additional funding to the acquisition. The $240 million, ten-year SATOC became a $350M ten-year SATOC, and additional time was required for the necessary revisions and approvals for the RAC that will replace the cmTent contract.

The cunent contract is a Total Environmental Remediation Contract (TERC) performed under a Joint Venture (JV) between Jacobs and Tetra-Tech Enviromnental. Under the business agreement between Jacobs and Tetra-Tech, Jacobs performs all work related to New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site and Tetra Tech performs all other work under the contract. Since all the work covered under this J&A is for New Bedford, the sole source Interim Bridge IDIQ will be awarded solely to Jacobs. Jacobs possess the specialized experience required to perform the sole source IDIQ Contract. Each task order awarded under the proposed IDIQ would be cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) as further indicated below.

This project is being completed through an Interagency Agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The work is currently conducted by Jacobs Engineering and their team of subcontractors through the TERC utilizing cost reimbursable with incentive fee task orders. CmTent funding comes from EPA's Superfund Tmst Fund (congressional appropriation of general treasury money.

The New Bedford Harbor Superfund site is located in New Bedford, Fairhaven and Acushnet, Massachusetts. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) was requested by the U.S. Enviromnental Protection Agency (EPA) to clean-up PCB contaminated sediments from New Bedford Harbor. The Harbor was contaminated from the 1940s through the 1970s by two electrical capacitor manufactming plants that discharged PCB waste. Water, sediment and biota have been contaminated endangering public health and the environment with PCB levels in sediment exceeding 100,000 parts per million (ppm).

The USACE has been supporting EPA on this project since the mid-1980s. The initial site remediation ("the hot spot") was carried out in the early 1990s (Record of Decision #1) and involved dredging 14,000 cubic yards of sediment with PCB levels exceeding 4,000 ppm. EPA's Record of Decision (ROD) #2 was signed in September 1998 and addresses this phase of the project. This ROD was subsequently modified via the CERCLA process to reflect the current scope of remedial action which involves the excavation and dredging of approximately 880,000 cubic yards (CY) of PCB contaminated sediment, and mechanically de-watering the sediment for transportation and disposal (T&D) to off-site landfill(s).

On October 10, 2012, the U.S. Enviromnental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the Commonwealth) announced a proposed settlement with a PRP, A VX Corp. (A VX) for $366.25 million, plus interest, regarding the NBHSS.

The settlement needs to be approved by the Court following a public comment period. If approved, the current plan is for the cash-out settlement to be paid to the United States and the Commonwealth jointly, and retained by EPA. The EPA will use the cash from the settlement towards the NBHSS remediation. This will greatly accelerate the pace of the cleanup of PCB contaminated sediment in New Bedford Harbor. As a result, protection of public health and the environment will be more rapidly achieved. The settlement funds are to be paid out in three installments over two years. This will allow for expedited operations including simultaneous dredging operations.

The estimated time to completion of the cleanup will be reduced fi'om 40 years to approximately eight to ten yem·s. In addition to the environmental and public health benefits, expedited cleanup of the hm·bor will allow for greater economic development along the Acushnet River and recreational use of the river and Harbor. The planning documents for the new RAC procurement (Acquisition Strategy, Acquisition Plan, Source Selection Plan, etc.) have been submitted for approval to reflect the increased funding stremn. The revision to the RAC planning documents has delayed the issuance of the Request for Proposal (RFP) by six to seven months. The settlement will allow the protection of public health and the environment to be more rapidly achieved and has been applauded by local authorities, citizens, businesses, and politicians. The funding will become available sometime in the Summer 2013 but may be delayed by either an extended public comment period on the proposed settlement and/or judicial ruling. Once the funding becomes available, there will be an expectation from the EPA, public and politicians for immediate action at the site. Due to the delay in executing a new RAC and typical mobilization and startup durations, the new contractor will not be ready to implement the work until Smmner of 2014. This will leave a gap of approximately one year without a contractor to perform remediation work.

At this time, there are two ml\ior project uncertainties: when funding will be received from the settlement and when the new Remedial Action Contract (RAC) for NBHSS

Remedial Action will be awarded. The Sole Source IDIQ is required to ensure that dredging of contaminated sediment continues to occur in 2013 and 2014. It is estimated that a new Contractor will require a minimum of ten months to complete work plans and mobilize new equipment after the existing equipment is demobilized. The Sole Source IDIQ will allow for approximately 125 days of dredging along with technical suppmt, operation and maintenance ofthe dewatering and water treatment facilities, enough to be sure we do not lose a dredging season.

The Sole Source interim bridge contract needs to be an IDIQ contract with cost plus fixed fee task orders due to the following:

• Anticipated uncertain funding stream from EPA;

• Different remediation technologies as work will include sediment removal via mechanical dredging, hydraulic dredging, and shoreline excavation;

• Both the previous TERC and new RAC are cost-reimbursable which have proven to be a successful given the project uncettainties/variables;

• Uncertain schedule associated with the approval of the new RAC;

• Costly demobilization of plant equipment from existing TERC upon award of newRAC;

• A CPFF contract is the most appropriate contract type for the because the scope of the dredging operation has numerous uncertainties including depth of the contamination, amount of contamination, type of material (sand versus organics), amount of debris to be removed, timing of dredging due to tides, and characteristics of waste disposal.

3. Description of Supplies/Services: USACE was requested by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to clean-up PCB contaminated sediments from New Bedford Harbor. The USACE has been supporting EPA on this project since the mid-1980s.

a. Dredging/Excavation: Approximately 650,000 cubic yards (CY) of contaminated soil and sediment remain in upper, lower and outer harbor. Based on current remediation practices and proposed settlement funding levels, the time to complete this work is estimated at eight to ten years. Confirmatory sampling is required to assure clean up goals are met. This environmental dredging is specialized work requiring experienced personnel and equipment. A relatively thin layer of contaminated sediment needs to be removed while minimizing environmental impacts (re-suspension of sediment, spread of contamination). In addition, three shallow draft dredges are required to allow for dredging in different areas of the upper estuary during varying tide levels. Shoreline remediation and wetlands restoration will be required to complete the remediation.

b. Mechanical De-Watering/Water Treatment: A variety of material (clay, silt, marine organics and sand) is mechanically de-sanded and then de-watered utilizing state of-the-art dewatering technology. The de-watered sediment is transported for disposal at off-site landfills. About 660,000 CY of in-situ material dredged from the harbor will be de-watered. The initial de-sanding process is performed at the Sawyer Street location.

The de-sanded material is then pumped to the facility, which includes features for transportation via railroad and/or truck. The facility has been fully operational since 2004. The dredging, mechanical sediment de-watering operation and the subsequent waste transportation and disposal commenced in the summer of 2004.

4. Authority Cited: 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1 and DFARS 206.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services will SatisfY Agency Requirements.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: FAR 6.302-1(a) (2) (iii) permits, for DoD, services to be deemed available only from the original source in the case offollow-on contracts for the continued provision of highly specialized services when it is likely that award to any other source would result in (A) Substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition; or (B) Unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirements. 10 U.S.C. 2304( d)(l )(B).

A. Background: The October 2012 announced settlement was not anticipated in the ongoing procurement action for a new RAC to replace the existing TERC. EPA and the Department of Justice ( DOJ) were snbject to a confidentiality agreement which prevented them from notifying USACE of the terms of the settlement. Once the settlement became public, EPA requested that USACE revise its ceiling cost for the new procurement to allow for project completion in ten years under the new RAC. This meant increasing the total capacity of the new RAC from $240M to $350M over a ten year ordering period. The main reason for the increase in total capacity is to avoid the need to procure an additional contract in tluee to five years to complete the project. The change in the strategy for the new procurement has caused a delay of six to seven months. This will leave a gap of approximately one year without a contractor to pe1form remediation work due to time required to acquire the services, procure equipment, complete work plans and mobilize to the site. A protest against award of the new RAC could increase the duration of the gap. The proposed sole source contract will bridge this gap between competitively-awarded contracts.

The existing contract (DACW33-03-D-0006) is a $240M IDIQ TERC that was competitively awarded in May 2003 to Jacobs Engineering/Tetra Tech, Joint Venture.

The JV was awarded the TERC after a best value tradeoff evaluation because of their expertise in hydraulic dredging, mechanical dewatering and water treatment. The contract scope of work includes, but is not limited to, site definition, studies, remedial investigations, feasibility studies, decision documents, designs, interim actions, remedial actions, short-term operations and maintenance, and any. other actions necessary for site remediation of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW). The TERC requires the contractor to fumish and transport all plant, labor, materials and equipment, and to perform all work necessary to complete simultaneous task orders at confirmed or suspected HTRW sites within the area covered by the Nmth Atlantic Division. The ordering period on the TERC was ten years.

The estimate for bridging the gap until the new contractor is available to dredge is $45M, which will be used to fund approximately 125 dredge days. Complete demobilization of

Jacobs is required at the conclusion of the dredge season. Therefore capacity is included for this demobilization, shoreline excavation, and associated remediation related tasks.

The cost of work to keep remediation going between expiration of the existing TERC and the upcoming RAC is an additional $45M.

The intent is to also to provide for some overlap between contractors to allow for a smoother transition. Some overlap between contractors to allow for the demobilization of one contractor while the new contractor was procuring equipment, prepm·ing work plans, and mobilizing dredge equipment to the site is advantageous to the Govemment in that it would ensure continuous operations at the site and maximum efficiency in protecting human health and the environment. The sole source interim bridge IDIQ would therefore provide for the following uninterrupted schedule of operations:

• Interim bridge contractor begins work under sole source bridge IDIQ: Expected October 2013.

• Planned new RAC award date along with award of the first task: Expected Janumy 2014

• New RAC contractor develops work plans, submittals: Expected February 2014 - July 2014.

• New RAC contractor begins site mobilization: Expected August 2014.

• New RAC contractor begins dredging and processing materials: Expected

October 2014.

• Interim bridge contractor demobilizes: Expected June 2014 -August 2014.

B. Justification:

(1) The services required are highly specialized. The NBHSS is a unique project in both its complexity and scale. The work is currently conducted by Jacobs Engineering and their temn of subcontractors through a TERC utilizing cost reimbursable with incentive fee task orders. This team includes perhaps the top contaminated sediment processing contractor in the country as well as several individuals who are considered expe1is in their field to perform precision environmental dredging and highly specialized sediment treatment located at NBHSS.

NBHSS operations m·e unique in both their complexity and scale. Highly contaminated sediment is pumped in a slurry through de-sanding, dewatering and treatment processes with the end product being clean water and dry filter cake that is then shipped to an offsite disposal facility. The optimization of the chemicals and flocculent and proper management of the waste stream is essential to the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the entire process and a slowdown of any component of the treatment and dewatering process would directly impact the rate of dredging since the entire process works as a single operation. In addition, if any single subunit malfunctions, the entire operation goes down. The treatment plants and booster pumps are designed in parallel to avoid complete shutdown of any component of treatment. Multiple dredges are installed at different locations to allow for changing dredging location in the event ofloss of water (low tide) or pipe clog.

The Site has a long history. USACE has been supporting the EPA since the mid 1980's and USACE was requested by the EPA to clean up PCB contaminated sediments fi·om New Bedford Harbor. EPA's Record of Decision (ROD) #2 was signed in September 1998 and addresses the remedial action of the upper and lower harbor. This ROD was subsequently modified via the CERCLA process to reflect the current scope of remedial action which involves the excavation and dredging of approximately 880,000 CY of PCB contaminated sediment, and mechanically de-watering the sediment for transportation and disposal (T&D) to off-site landfill(s).

A mechanical de-watering building, material transfer facility, and a water treatment plant (the facility) were completed in 2003 and full scale dredging started in 2004. Jacobs Engineering has been supporting USACE since 2004. EPA has historically funded the project at a rate of approximately $15M per year (which provides for approximately 40 days of dredging/treatment/T&D per year). Including the 2012 dredge season, approximately 250,000 CY of material has been removed to date.

The project has been very successful to date in part due to the continuity in staff and contractors that this Sole Source ID/IQ contract vehicle allows. Lessons learned can be applied to each new dredging /treatment cycle increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the operations. Jacobs ordering period expires in May 2013. The intent is to allow a minimum of fom months overlap between the sole source contract and the new RAC to allow the new Contractor to develop a working understanding of the current operations and time to develop construction work plans without interrupting the work progress.

(2) A full and open competition would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirement.

The need to continue dredging to remove contaminated material is critical for the protection of human health and improvement of the environment. Water, sediment and biota in the harbor have been endangering public health and the environment for years, with PCB levels in sediment exceeding 100,000 parts per million (ppm). In order to reduce the public health and environmental risk of leaving the contamination in place, the EPA, through the ROD, has mandated a Project Action Level of 10 ppm for clean up in the upper harbor. EPA has gone on the record stating their intent to dramatically increase the pace of the environmental cleanup in 2013 to reach their objective of protection of human health and the environment, as demonstrated in the quotations from their press releases.

• "The settlement paves the way for expedited implementation of the cleanup of the New Bedford Harbor Site at full capacity, providing more rapid protection of public health and the environment."

• Ignacia Moreno, Assistant Attomey General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the DOJ- "The recovery ... will result in ... faster restoration of the harbor for the use and benefit of the public."

• Curt Spalding, EPA Region I Administrator- "Cleanup work will proceed much faster with dedicated funding ... "

Additionally, the Commonwealth and local authorities fully expect that the project will progress without delay not only to protect of human health and the environment but to enhance the economic benefits associated with a remediated harbor.

• Massachusetts Attorney General, Martha Coakley- "The settlement also significantly accelerates the schedule so the region can feel the economic benefits sooner rather than later."

USACE anticipates five to ten years cleanup duration at new funding levels if work is performed in accordance with the existing ROD. The EPA press releases call for the cleanup to take "five to seven years" and with this aggressive schedule the Government cannot afford to have a slow start in 2013. Given the above, a delay in remedial action of one year would be unacceptable.

This sole source IDIQ contract is the only action that would prevent the loss of an entire year of remediation work. The objective is to make immediate progress toward cleanup of the NBHSS upon receipt of the settlement money. Use of the incumbent (Jacobs) is the only way to accomplish this. There is not enough time to acquire a new contract under an open competition as demonstrated by the following acquisition timeline showing the steps required to put a new contract vehicle in place.

• prepare the request for proposal for a new contract vehicle (90 days)

• time required for offerors to prepare their proposals (45 days)

• evaluate proposals and award (this would be a best value tradeoff selection due to the need to insure that the selected contractor has the necessary capabilities) (30 days)

• prepare initial work plans required prior to mobilizing to the site ( 45 days)

• review and approval of work plans (3 0 days)

• procure equipment and initial efforts on site to orient contractor to the site specific conditions and prepare for the dredging, sediment dewatering, water treatment efforts, transpmt and disposal (120 days)

The above timeframes reflect the optimum conditions but still represent, at best, a 12 month period which delays the start of this critical work. It would be one year without any removal of contaminated sediments during that time. The new RAC is scheduled to be awarded in January 2014.

In contrast, there are significant time savings if the District can utilize Jacobs immediately under a sole source contract. Jacobs is familiar with the project and the EPA's requirements. The existing scope, work plans and submittals will be utilized also saving time and effmt. Jacobs' equipment and processes are all in place. They can readily address the work required until the new RAC contractor is on-site and operating.

(3) A full and open competition would result in substantial duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition.

The process outlined above would cost approximately $15.6M as detailed below.

Competition would not recover any of these costs. These estimates are based on our experience with previous procurements of a similar nature as well as Jacobs' actual costs to prepare the same work plans for the NBHSS. Backup data related to Jacobs' costs and similar previous procurements are available at NAE.

Acquiring a new contractor would be through a best value tradeoff procurement as technical expe1tise and previous experience in dredging, mechanical dewatering and water treatment are more important considerations than cost. The work will also be performed through a cost reimbursable task order with the Government having considerable input into site operations. In fact, utilization of the incumbent contractor is the only viable option to bridge the one year gap while a new site specific RAC is secured. There are no cost advantages to acquiring a new contractor for this work for the following reasons:

• contractor has the experience and expertise to successfully perform this work

• we have historic cost and pricing data and are confident we can negotiate a fair and reasonable price

Following are costs that will be avoided with this action ($15.6M in duplicate costs):

• prepare the request for proposal ($25K)

• time required for offerors to prepare proposals (no Govemment. cost)

• evaluate proposals and award (this would be a best value tradeoff selection due to the need to ensure that the selected contractor has the necessary capabilities) ($25K)

• prepare initial work plans required prior to mobilizing to the site ($500K)

• review and approval of work plans ($50K)

• mobilization and demobilization ($15M)

An additional impact to the Government that would be difficult to fully recover or overcome would be the public perception over Government's inability to utilize funding for immediate remediation of the NBHSS

The estimated cost of demobilization of the current contractor and mobilization of a new gap contractor is estimated to be $15M and take a minimum often months without a single CY of contaminated sediment being removed. The demobilization includes full decontamination of existing plant, disassembling and removal of all existing plant. After award of a new contract, mobilization would include preparation of site plans by replacement contractor and installation of all new equipment. The timing and cost of demobilization andre-mobilization make it impossible to utilize anther contract vehicle to fill the gap between contracts. The estimated $15M in duplicative costs would not be recovered through competition. Jacobs is already mobilized to the New Bedford site, so there would be no cost duplication if US ACE were to award a sole source contract to Jacobs.

C. Impact: In addition to substantial cost duplication not expected to be recovered through competition, and unacceptable delays:

(1) Any delay in cleanup risks endangering human health and the environment through continued exposure to sediments and mudflats contaminated with PCBs.

Contaminated water, sediment and biota have been endangering public health and the environment with PCB levels in sediment exceeding 100,000 pmis per million (ppm).

The Project Action Level for clean up in the upper harbor is 10 ppm will greatly reduce this risk, if dredging of the contamination can be continued without inten-uption.

(2) Expedited cleanup of the harbor will allow for greater economic development along the Acushnet River and recreational use of the river and Harbor. Economic development and recreation will be stifled as long as the stigma of PCB contamination remains.

(3) If the work is stopped and delayed for at least a yem·, costs for mothballing the site would be incurred. The estimate for mothballing the site is $5M for the season. After the new RAC is awarded, depending if the new incumbent is selected for the new RAC or not, demobilization/mobilization cost may be incun-ed on top of the $5M.

( 4) Allowing the site to remain idle while the new RAC is procured would cause loss of credibility of the EPA and USACE with the local community, which has been involved in the cleanup activities for several decades. The EPA Remedial Project Manager has expressed concern regarding USACE's ability to provide support for the 2013/2014 season based on the schedule of the new RAC and the May 2013 expiration of the TERC. The public, Commonwealth and local authorities are on record expressing their support of an expedited cleanup including the benefits to public health and the local economy. The public is very vocal regarding NBHSS. The Government (EPA and USACE) would face very negative publicity if the site were mothballed for a season due to USACE's inability to have a contractor in the field and ready to perform when the settlement money is received.

D. Alternatives: USACE and EPA need to show immediate progress in the clean-up of NBHSS upon receipt of$366.25M of settlement funding. Based on the May 2013 end of the ordering period for the existing TERC and timeline for the award of a new RAC (January 2014), and necessary mobilization requirements, there is a one year gap in our ability to put a contractor in the field. There is no other viable option to bridge the gap except by awarding a sole source contract to Jacobs.

(1) Separate competitively procured bridge contract: The cost of demobilizing the TERC contractor and mobilizing a new contractor to bridge the gap (bridge contractor) between the expiration of the TERC and the stmi-up of the new RAC is estimated at $15M. The time required to mobilize a new contractor under a bridge contract could take up to 15 months for procurement of the bridge contract, time to procure bridge contractors' equipment for dewatering and water treatment, preparation of work plans, and mobilization of dredge equipment. It is not feasible to utilize an existing IDIQ or attempt to place another new C-type contract to bridge the gap between the existing TERC and new RAC due to the cost and time required to ready a contractor for the field work. There is also a steep learning curve likely to result in a higher cost perCY of dredged sediment dming the bridge year. In addition, there would be another $15M and I 0 months to demobilize the gap contractor and mobilize the new RAC contractor.

(2) One altemative considered was an extension of the ordering period and contract capacity of the existing TERC. This approach would have achieved the same objective as this sole somce contract; however approval of the ordering period beyond a ten-year dmation would require multiple lev~ls of approval outside ofUSACE. This could not have been achieved before the ordering period expired.

(3) Another alternative considered was to access a contractor under another pre placed remedial action contract (PRAC). This approach would eliminate the need for a time consuming and expensive new procmement, but still would have required an additional three months and $25,000 just to get to the point where a task order could be awarded (SOW development). The new contractor would then have had to prepare a series of work plans prior to the start of any on-site activity. In EPA Region I, it typically takes six months to have plans prepared and approved for a complex site like NBHSS.

The plans would include an Execution Plan, Site Safety and Health Plan, Contractor Quality Control Plan, and Quality Assurance Project Plan. The cost of preparing this set of plans is approximately $500,000 based on our experience with earlier phases of the NBHSS project. A new contractor would not be available or even be in a position to start on site work until spring of 2014 at the earliest. The Govemment would be required to invest more time that duplicates prior solicitation effmis with no direct benefit to the project completion. No contaminants would be removed from the harbor for the 2013 season. Additionally, the cost of demobilization ofthe TERC contractor and mobilization of another PRAC contractor would cost $15M.

(4) Jacobs Engineering is teamed with numerous small business subcontractors.

These firms are also the keys to successfully completing the project. Directly contracting with these subcontractors is not an option for NAE as their effectiveness is their ability to work as a team with Jacobs Engineering, who is managing the effmi and providing their technical expetiise in dredging operations. None of the smaller finns involved in this project has the demonstrated ability or resomces to manage and staff a multi-phased Superfund cleanup project. This was demonstrated during market research for the new RAC (being procured under a separate action), in which four small businesses were rated as marginally qualified to handle this scope of services.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: This J&A is for a sole source contract to Jacobs. The solicitation for the cutTent TERC was unrestricted and four offerors submitted proposals.

The contract (DACW33-03-D-0006), a $240M IDIQ type TERC, was awarded in May 2003 to Jacobs Engineering/Tetra Tech Joint Venture.

While pursuing the alternative of extending the current TERC, the District posted a Notice of Intent (NO I) to sole source the above-mentioned New Bedford work to Jacobs/Tetra Tech, JV on the FedBizOpps website on January 22,2013. The 15 day response period ended on February 6, 2013. There was no response to the NO I.

Additionally, a second NOI was posted to FedBizOpps on May 9, 2013. This J&A will be updated to include the results of the NO I.

A new RAC procurement is underway which will be a competitive best value trade-off procurement. Further competition for this bridge action is not feasible.

7. Actions to Increase Competition: The purpose of this J &A is solely to bridge the gap between expiration of the TERC and execution of the new RAC. The 2013 season of dredging must occur seamlessly to ensure protection of human health and the environment, and confidence with the public, the Co1111110nwealth and local authorities that the settlement money will be managed in an expeditious and responsible manner, without bringing the project work to a halt.

All future actions at the NBHSS will be accomplished under different contracts including the new RAC. The District will develop acquisition strategies for this future work based on armual funding and requirements set forth by the EPA. The new RAC will be a competitively bid contract, utilizing a best value tradeoff acquisition approach. Any new contracts for future work at the NBHSS will be competed.

8. Market Research: See paragraph 5.D.

The remaining work at this site will be completed using the new RAC, for which the District performed market research as part of its acquisition planning.

While pursuing the alternative of extending the current TERC, the District posted a NOI to sole source the above-mentioned New Bedford work to Jacobs/Tetra Tech, JV on the FedBizOpps website on January 22, 2013. The 15 day response period ended on February 6, 2013. There was no response to NO I.

Additionally, a second NOI was posted to FedBizOpps on May 9, 2013. This J&A will be updated to include the results of the NO I.

9. Interested Sources: The District posted a NOI to sole source this work on January 22, 2013. The 15 day response period ended on February 6, 2013. There was no response to the NOI.

Additionally, a second NOI was posted to FedBizOpps on May 9, 2013. This J&A will be updated to include the results of the NO I.

Jacobs Engineering is teamed with numerous small business subcontractors. These films are also the keys to successfully completing the project.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement history.

(1) Contract DACW33-03-D-0006 is a $240M IDIQ TERC that was competitively awarded in 2003 to Jacobs Engineering/Tetra Tech Joint Venture under an uru·estricted procurement. The TERC has a 1 0-year ordering period, and is due to expire at the end of May2013.

(2) The TERC ten- year ordering period expires at the end of May 2013.

Originally it was anticipated that a new RAC would be in place by May 2012 to allow for a one-year overlap between the contracts. Issuance ofthe RAC solicitation was rescheduled to early March 2013. After the tetms of the proposed settlement were made public, the decision was made to request increasing the capacity on the new RAC from $240M to $350M. This has further delayed the new RAC timeline to January2014 for the initial Task Order Award.

(3) The cunent TERC capacity has been fully utilized and the oi·dering period will expire in late May 2013.

b. Acquisition data availability. There are very few projects in the country that present the challenges faced by the contractor working in New Bedford. The work is cunently conducted through a TERC utilizing cost reimbursable with incentive fee task orders. This team includes perhaps the top contaminated sediment processing contractor in the country as well as several individuals who are considered experts in their field. A new RAC procurement is underway but the timeline leaves a gap between the new RAC and the existing TERC.

c. Unusual and compelling urgency- Nl A

d. Subcontracting competition. Jacobs Engineering is teamed with several small businesses. They have successfully met all their small business goals as part of the existing TERC. A new subcontracting plan will be negotiated with Jacobs and incorporated within this contract.

Control #NAE-13-1

II. Technical Certification:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, which are included in this justification, are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belie[

Namc,f0 ~aryellen Iorio Date: j_1e Mti.jL 20 i 3 Project Manager

12. Requirements Certification:

I certifY that the supp011ing data under my cognizance, which are included in this justification, arc accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and bclicr.

Name: SCOTT E. ACON[\ Date; \(o m~zocs Chier. Engineering and Planning Division

Signature:

13. Fait· and Reasonable Cost Determination:

Name:

Signature:_

I hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. Cost will be negotiated based on historical data and compared to an Independent Government Esti~t~l~.\ 1 2 SHEILA WINSTON-V!NCUILLA Date: $~

'io~~~

14. Contracting Officer Certification:

I cc1:tify that this J&A is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and

Name:

belief. .

SHEILA WINSTON-VINCUII.LA Date: 5\~-

Signature:

J .

Approval

Based on the foregoing, I hereby approve the award of a sole source Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) construction contract to Jacobs Engineering for the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, New Bedford, MAin the amount of$45,000,000.00 on an other than full and open competitive basis pursuant to the authority of 1 OU.S.C.2304( c) (1) and FAR 6.302-1 "Only one responsible and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements." This procurement is subject to the availability of funds.

Date: ..3 tJ;11-e ..4<fJ 13 ~~ Director of Contracting U.S. A1my Corps of Engineers