Justification Approval.pdf

JUSTIFICATION REVIEW DOCUMENT FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

CONTROL NO NAE15-15

PROJECT/EQUIPMENT: Sole Source Contract Remedial Action Construction

New Bedford Superfund Site AUTHORITY: 10 U.S.C.2304 (c )(1) as implement by FAR 6.302-1 & DFARS 206.302-1 AMOUNT: $58,000,000.00

NAME {Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO Prepared By: Maryellen Iorio 978-318-8433

TITLE DATE

Project Manager 31'5120\5 NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO

Contracting Officer Sheila Winston-VIncuilla 978-318-8159

TITLE DATE

Same as 13 & 141n J&A Contracting Officer 3 I lR I 2-o \ f.;- NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE: NO

Technical Maryellen Iorio 978-318-8433

TITLE DATE

Project Manager .3 is b-OIS"" NAME (Type cir Print) TELEPHON'E NO

Requirements Scott Acone 978-318-8162

TITLE DATE

Chief, Engineering and Planning Division J:>/5/2.D\c;

SIGNATURES ARE REQUIRED BELOW:

1 have revieWed this J&A and find t/1 justification adequate to support other thafl full and open competition

I

Deputy for Small Business

Project Manager* If no PM, use N/A

Office of Counsel

DCC/CCC Contracting Chf

Deputy District Commander

PARC Counsel

Assistant Director for Small Business Programs

Special Competition Advocate

, ~Type or Print) Eva Marie D'Antuono,., SIGNATURE-

FOR PARC"(WIN/ATLIDAL) APPROVAL:

SlGNATUREi-JEBEL.BARBARA.N.1228746874 ~?.~~~'.'!':.--

NAME {Type or Print) Barbara Hebel

SIGNATURE

Dfgitally signed by8

DATE

S /GJ~~- f' i •:{

TELEPHONE NO

978-318-8427

I,QAJ.E. ..

TELEPHONE NO

347-370-4590

DATE

KSTRAN05COTT.V.1174773902

BECKSTRAND.SCOTI.V.117 4778902 DN:c=US, o=U.S. Gm rnment, OU=OOD, ou:pKJ, ou=USA,cn=BECKSTRAND.SCOTT.V.ll74778902

NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO Scott Beckstrand 347-370-4515 Sl~IJ.A~KEVIN PATRICK ,j 0 Dlglt'l~>lgoe<lbySTDDDARDJ<EION.PATRICK1050424681 DATE

• • • DN: e=-US, eo=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, otFPKI, oU=:USA, 50424681 r' cn=STODOAHD.KEVtN.PATRICK 1050424681 n, ;,,no , ' '

NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO COL Ke\lin P. Stoddard , USA 202-761--4707

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

1. CONTRACTING ACTIVITY:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), New England District, 696 Virginia Road, Concord

MA01742.

2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:

(a) Description: The action being proposed is for an increase in capacity, in the amount of $58 million (M) and a ten month extension of contract ordering period, for a bridge contract on the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site (NBHSS) project, Interim Remedial Action Contract (Bridge RAC), W912WJ-14-D-0002. This increase in capacity and ordering period is requested so that the Bridge RAC contractor, Jacobs Field Services (Jacobs), can continue to provide highly specialized remedial action services while corrective action is undertaken on the new NBHSS RAC (new RAC) Solicitation No. W912WJ-14-R-0003/Contract No. W912WJ-15-D OOO 1 and a new RAC award is final and conclusive.

The Bridge RAC is a Single Award Task Order Contract (SATOC). The SATOC was awarded on 18 Febmary 2014 with a six month base and two six month opt~e contract ordering period expires on 14 August 2015. The Bridge RAC has ...._in remaining capacity reserved for maintenance of the facilities and technical support through June 2015, and for the final demobilization prior to the mobilization of the new RAC awardee. The Bridge RAC does not have sufficient capacity or duration to allow for dredging to be continued until the new RAC can proceed.

Contract No. W912WJ-15-D-0001 (new RAC) is a $350M SATOC awarded on 17 November 2014 to Jacobs. Although, $45M in capacity has been awarded under the Bridge RAC and an additional $58M is proposed in increased capacity in this Justification and Approval (J&A), the full $350M will be included in the new RAC to allow additional contamination that may be identified during the ten year remediation. The new RAC award was protested by CB&I and Cashman Joint Venture (CuBIC JV) on 5 December 2014. On 7 January 2015, the New England District notified GAO of its decision to take corrective action to include re-evaluation of the proposals and new award decision. The protest was dismissed. The cmTective action that the District will undertake includes amendment of the solicitation, requests for revised proposals, evaluation by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB), possible discussions, final proposal revisions, and at least one final reconvening of the SSEB, Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC), and issuance of a new Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD). After that, it is likely that the District will receive at least one more protest on the new RAC award, which will also require more time before the protest is resolved and the new RAC can be executed.

The District has been preparing the amendment and associated revisions to the solicitation. After final internal review, the amendment is tentatively scheduled to be issued 30 April2015. The

2 of17

District expects the entire corrective action process to culminate in a new award decision by the end of October 2015. A chati showing all the expected and possible actions required to reach this award decision is included with this J&A. A possible protest and its resolution are estimated to conclude at the end of February 2016. Thus, work under the new RAC would not realistically be able to proceed until that time. It will take a minimum of ten months for the new RAC contractor to procure equipment, complete work plans, and mobilize to the site. If there is no protest, hydraulic dredging with a new RAC contractor would be expected to begin September 2016 (10 months from the October 2015 award decision date). If there is a protest, hydraulic dredging activities with a new RAC contractor would be delayed until March 2017 since the Acushnet River is often covered with ice from December until early March (October 2016 would be 10 months from the conclusion of the protest in February 2016). The extension of the duration of the ordering period for the Bridge RAC requested in this J&A assumes there will be no protest. It also assumes that Jacobs will continue site operation and maintenance (O&M) until the new RAC contractor is mobilized to the site in August 2016. The modification of the Bridge RAC for final demobilization and site O&M would be awarded to Jacobs when the protest is concluded, estimated to be Februaty 2016.

This project is being completed through an Interagency Agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) utilizing funds acquired from the 2012 Settlement which is described below. The contract award is funded through the Hazardous Substance Superfund Trust Fund, appropriation 68X8145.

(b) Bridge RAC History: The District originally obtained approval for the new Site Specific RAC as a $240M 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) occurred which allowed the addition of a significant amount of funding to the acquisition. The $240M, ten-year SATOC became a $350M ten-year SATOC.

The Bridge RAC, a Sole Source Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) construction contract with a $45M capacity and one and one half year duration (six month base and two six month options), was approved on 3 June 2013. (See copy of approved J&A for Bridge RAC, Attachment 1). The 2014 dredging work was perfmmed under the Bridge RAC through Cost Reimbursable with Fixed Fee (CPFF) task orders.

With the influx of funds from the PRP settlement, the estimated time for completion of the cleanup was reduced from 40 years to approximately five to seven years. Fmiher issues with the final cleanup may arise as the project proceeds, but this is the current schedule. The settlement will allow the protection of public health and the environment to be more rapidly achieved. In addition to the environmental and public health benefits, expedited cleanup of the New Bedford Harbor will allow for greater economic development along the Acushnet River and recreational use of the river. The accelerated cleanup of the Harbor and has been applauded by local authorities, citizens, businesses, and politicians. There is an expectation from the EPA, public, and politicians for immediate action at the site. Due to the delay in executing the new RAC and typical mobilization and stmiup durations, a new contractor will not be ready to implement the work until2016. This would leave a gap of approximately one year without a contractor to perfmm remediation work.

3 of17

A $58M increase in capacity and ten-month extension of ordering period of the Bridge RAC will allow US ACE to dredge in the 2015 season. The increase in capacity and extension of the ordering period will allow for approximately II days of dredging (estimated at-; adjacent intertidal clean-up, which is required to allow for planned development by the City of New Bedford; and removal of contaminated sediments adjacent to active recreation on Pierce Mill Cove (~stimated-, technical support, and O&M of the site facilities including the de sanding, dewatering, and water treatment systems until June 2016 when the new RAC contractor may be operational (estimated •. The increase in capacity and ten-month extension of the ordering period is enough to ensure that at least this remediation will continue in the 2015 dredging season while the conective action and possible further protest take place. It allows for sufficient time for possible demobilization of the cunent contractor, mobilization of a new contractor, and some overlap between the contractors. This will allow the project to proceed until the conective action is completed and a conclusive determination of awardee is made. The Government does not intend to request an increase in the capacity and duration, above and beyond what is being proposed in this J&A.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES OR NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION:

USACE was requested by the EPA to clean-up polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) contaminated sediments from New Bedford Harbor.

(a) Dredging/Excavation: cubic yards (CY) of contaminated soil and sediment were removed in FY 2014. ,400 CY of contaminated soil and sediment remain in the upper and lower harbor. Approximately 241,000 CY remain in the upper harbor for hydraulic dredging. The amount of additional sediment to be removed during clean up dredge passes has not been determined. Based on cunent remediation practices and proposed settlement funding levels, the time to complete this work is estimated at five to seven 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 environmental · ension of sediment, spread of vvJ.J~~~~ dredging to ensure that recontamination does not occur. Wetlands restoration will be required in some areas to complete the remediation.

(b) Desanding/Mechanical De-Watering/Water Treatment: A variety of material (clay, silt, marine organics and sand) is mechanically de-sanded and then de-watered utilizing advanced dewatering technology. The de-watered sediment is transported for disposal at off-site landfills. About 300,000 CY ofin-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 Hervey Tichon facility, which includes features for transportation via railroad and/or truck.

4 of17

(c) Mobilization/Demobilization: All equipment at the NBHSS is contractor-owned and will remain in place for the duration of the Bridge RAC. The major components are described in the paragraph 3b. These components must be customized to match the layout and size limitations of the existing Government-owned buildings at the Sawyer Street (Area C) and Hervey Tichon Facility (Area D). Areas C and Area Dare located 7,000 feet apart.

Mobilization of a new contractor will require the · · s equipment. In 2004, it took the Jacobs team more than develop site plans, dredge and processing plans, finalize initial new all necessary equipment and materials for Jacobs' initial dredge season. In today's dollars the same effort would cost approximately- Depending on the new contractor's team, it could potentially take longer for another contractor because the lead time for specialty equipment. All specialty equipment must be properly designed for the various contaminated sediment types at the NBHSS and must be sized to fit the existing infrastructure. If major equipment must be procured, it can take between six and twelve months after the design is approved to procure the equipment. All major equipment must be transported to the site, put into place by cranes, various components assembled, plumbed wired to contractor- · d electrical panels existing infrastructure.

Demobilization of the current contractor will consist of removing all the equipment described above. All equipment and the building will need to be thoroughly decontaminated before the equipment and supplies are removed from the site. This activity is expected to take four to five months and cost approximately .

4. AUTHORITY CITIED:

10 U.S.C. § 2304(c)(1), Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements, as implemented by FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii), For DoD, services may be deemed to be available only from the original source in the case of follow-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. (See 10 U.S.C.

2304(d)(l)(B).)

5 of17

5. REASON FOR AUTHORITY CITIED:

A $58M increase in Bridge RAC capacity and ten-month extension of time is proposed because Jacobs is the only source that can provide continued highly specialized services to fulfill the project requirements, and award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays and substantial duplication in costs that would not be recovered through competition.

(a) Project Background:

The NBHSS is unique in its environmental complexity, size and scope. USACE has been supporting the EPA at the NBHSS since the mid 1980's when USACE was requested by the EPA to help map out a clean-up strategy for highly PCB-contaminated sediments from the New Bedford Harbor. USACE has utilized various contracts since the 1980's to assist the EPA in meeting their goals for the site. The Bridge RAC (W912WJ -14-D- 0002-0001) was most recently preceded by Contract No. DACW33-03-D-0006, a $240M IDIQ Total Environmental Restoration Contract (TERC). The TERC required the contractor to furnish 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 Nmih Atlantic Division (NAD).

The TERC was competitively awarded in May 2003 to Jacobs Engineering/Tetra Tech JV. Jacobs executes the work at the NBHSS and Tetra Tech executes the work at other sites throughout NAD.

The Sole Source Bridge RAC was approved on 3 June 2013 through a J&A authorizing a sole source contract to Jacobs Field Services. At the time of the approval of the Bridge RAC, it was anticipated that the new RAC would be awarded in January 2014. The duration of the Bridge RAC was based on the assumption that it would take approximately 10 months for the new RAC contractor to procure equipment, complete work plans, and mobilize to the site. The Bridge RAC estimate for 2014 was $45M and allowed for llldredge days, operations and maintenance of the treatment system and project site, technical assistance, report writing, sampling and analysis, and demobilization. The cunent remaining capacity on the Bridge RAC allows for maintenance of the facilities until June 2015, technical suppmi until June 2015, and final demobilization prior to the mobilization of the new RAC awardee.

Although the Bridge RAC ordering period does not expire until14 August 2015, there is not adequate remaining capacity to continue remediation through 2015. The increase in duration is to extend the contract-ordering period until 14 June 2016. The increase in the ordering period will allow for a task order modification to be awarded prior to 14 June 2016 to extend the period of performance for continued site O&M through August 2016 and the period of performance for technical support through November 2016. The intent is to provide for some overlap between contractors; therefore, some capacity under the Bridge RAC will be maintained to allow for a smooth transition. The overlap is advantageous to the Government to ensure continuous operations at the site and maximum efficiency in protecting human health and the environment. The overlap is also needed to allow for the demobilization of one contractor, while the new contractor

6 of17 procures equipment, prepares execution plans, and mobilizes equipment to the site.

These overlapping O&M and technical support tasks will need to be awarded prior to 14 June 2016; the date on which the Bridge RAC would expire if the proposed extension of the ordering period and capacity increase is approved.

The increase in capacity of the Bridge RAC would therefore provide for the following uninterrupted schedule of operations:

• Bridge RAC contractor 2015 dredge season: May 2015 to November 2015

• Planned new RAC award date: October 2015

• Notice to Proceed on new RAC: January 2016

• New RAC contractor has approved execution plans and submittals: April2016 (6 months from Notice to Proceed)

• New RAC contractor procures equipment and mobilizes to site: August 2016 (10 months from Award date of new RAC)

• New RAC contractor begins dredging and processing materials: September 2016

• Bridge RAC contractor demobilizes: February 2016- May 2016 (4 months)

(b) This is a Follow-on Contract for the Continued Provision of Highly Specialized Services from the Original Contractor:

The operations in place at the NBHSS are unique in both their complexity and scale. The existing dredging and treatment systems were designed by Jacobs and its subcontractor team. All equipment at the site is contractor-owned.

Including the 2014 dredge season, approximately 277,000 CY of sediment has been removed to date by Jacobs. The Bridge RAC ordering period expires on 14 August 2015.

The intent of this J&A is also to provide an overlap between the Bridge RAC and the new RAC to allow the new contractor to develop a working understanding of the cunent site conditions, best management practices, and time to develop execution plans/submittals without intenupting the work progress.

7 of17

(c) The Proposed Contractor is the Only Contractor that is Capable for the Continued Provision of Highly Specialized Services Called for by the Execution Plan:

Another contractor could not simply adopt the processing system in the EPA-approved Execution Plan.

(1) The proposed contractor developed and owns the particular treatment process and equipment cunently in use at the NBHSS.

The Jacobs team has designed, installed, and is operating a processing system that is unique to the challenging requirements and contaminants of the NBHSS. This includes their design and installation of contractor-owned equipment to fit in the existing limited site space and infrastructure.

(2) The proposed contractor has developed patiicular expe1iise and a unique, customized treatment process to perform the remedial action required.

The Jacobs team has provided highly specialized services in creating the treatment process and making it productive at this jobsite. Over an 11 year period that the Jacobs team has worked at NBHSS, they have developed specialized processes to address the contaminated New Bedford Harbor sediments.

8 of17

(3) Jacobs has a thorough understanding of the site, project goals and customer concerns that a new contractor would need to develop before the 2015 dredge season implementation.

Since the site impacts multiple communities, the NBHSS is a highly visible project and there is significant public interest in the impacts of the remedy to the local residents.

(d) Alternatives Considered:

Since there is already a full and open competition underway for the award of the new RAC, this J &A to increase the capacity and extension to the ordering period of the Bridge RAC is the only alternative to continue to meet mission requirements requested by the

EPA.

Alternatives considered under the original Bridge RAC J&A were:

(1) Separate competitively contract: The cost of demobilizing the TERC contractor is estimated at mobilizing a new contractor to bridge the gap (bridge contractor) of the TERC and the stati-up of the new RAC is estimated The time required to mobilize a new contractor under a bridge ten 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 during the bridge year. In addition, there would be another cost of-o demobilize the gap contractor and approximatel~o mobilize the new RAC contractor with another ten

9 of17 month gap in remediation while the new RAC contractor procures equipment and mobilizes to the site.

(2) One alterative 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 source contract; however approval of the ordering period beyond a ten-year duration would require multiple levels of approval outside of USACE. This could not have been achieved before the ordering peliod expired.

(3) Another altemative considered was to access a contractor under another preplaced remedial action contract (PRAC). This approach would eliminate the need for a time consuming and expensive new procurement, but still would have required an additional three months and just to get to the point where a task order could be awarded (SOW development). The new contractor would then have had to prepare 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 Q~rance Project Plan. The cost of preparing this set of plans is approximately-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 2016 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 2015 season. Add't' ll th cost of demobilization of the TERC contractor is estimate another PRAC contractor would cost an estimated

I • I nd mobilization of

(4) Jacobs Engineering is teamed with numerous small business subcontractors. These fitms 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 effort and providing their technical expetiise in dredging operations. None of the smaller fitms involved in this project has the demonstrated ability or resources 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.

(e) Award to Any Other Contractor would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirement.

The schedule for the corrective action to allow for full and open competition is attached (Attachment 2). An award for the new RAC is expected in October 2015. Based on an October 2015 award date, the earliest a new contractor could begin dredging is September 2016. If there is a protest against the award decision, this could delay dredging by the new RAC Contractor until March 2017.

10 of17

In 2013, EPA stated their intent to dramatically increase the pace of the environmental cleanup to reach their objective of protection of human health and the environment.

The need to continue dredging to remove contaminated material is critical for the protection of human health and improvement of the environment. PCBs are known to cause numerous health effects including effects on the immune, reproduction, nervous, and endocrine system. PCBs have been shown to cause cancer in animals and are a suspected human carcinogen.

The public is exposed to PCBs at New Bedford by coming into contact with contaminated sediments (dermal contact), breathing air that contains vaporized PCBs primarily from contaminated mudflats (inhalation), and eating contaminated seafood (ingestion). A fishing ban is in effect for the area but fishing has been observed within the banned areas. The effects of PCB contamination are cumulative, with each exposure adding to the concentration of PCBs in the body.

Water, sediment and biota in the harbor have been endangering public health and the environment for years, with PCB levels in sediment exceeding 40,000 patis per million (ppm). In order to reduce the public health and environmental risk of leaving the contamination in place, the EPA, through the Record of Decision (ROD,) has mandated a cleanup level of 10 ppm for sediment clean up in the upper harbor and goal of 0.02 ppm for fish tissue. Blue mussels in the upper harbor have been found with tissue levels averaging 20 ppm or three orders of magnitude above the project goal of 0. 02 ppm for human consumption. Due to the elevated PCB levels at the site, the site is delineated by three state-sanctioned fishing closure areas (Areas 1, 2 and 3) extending approximately 6.8 miles north to south and encompassing approximately 18,000 acres in total. The EPA calls for the cleanup to take five to seven years and with this aggressive schedule, the Government cannot afford to stop all work in 2015.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and local authorities fully expect that the project will continue without delay, not only to protect human health and the environment, but also to enhance the economic benefits associated with a remediated harbor. Given the above, delay in remedial action of one year is unacceptable.

With contractor-owned infi-ast:mcture (pipelines, treatment buildings, processing equipment, railcars etc.) in place, the Jacobs team is available now to mobilize to the field and begin dredging in just a few weeks. This is necessary to achieve any production in the 2015 dredge season, which is critical for performing the project on schedule and wit~et. Annual mobilization, system stmiup, and demobilization cos~ Because of the high annual mobilization, system startup, and demobilization cost, it is not cost effective to mobilize for less than approximately ~ays of dredging. The actual number of dredge days is

11 of17 dependent on transportation and disposal (T &D) costs. T &D costs increase or decrease based on the amounts of filter cake produced during the dredge year.

If the Bridge RAC capacity is not increased and extended, by the time the new RAC award is conclusively decided and a new team brought in, the 2015 dredge season would be lost. There is no other contractor available now who can continue to provide the highly specialized services associated with having all necessary infrastructure and treatment system in place that complies with the approved Execution Plan. Continuing to utilize Jacobs will result in enormous schedule savings for the project.

The increase in capacity and ten-month extension of the ordering period of the Bridge RAC is the only action that would prevent the loss of an entire year of remediation work. The objective is to continue to make progress toward cleanup of the NBHSS with the settlement money. Use of Bridge RAC is the only way to accomplish this effort.

(f) Award to Any Other Contractor would result in substantial duplication of costs that would not be recovered through competition.

As stated in paragraph 3(d), above, it is estimat.mobilizing a new contractor to the site would cost approximately and would take approximately ten months to mobilize all the equipment to the site. Additionally, it will cost USACE approximately -o demobilize the Jacobs Team or · approximately ~n standby costs for all fixed equipment if the increase in capacity is not approved and the equipment is not utilized in 2015 due to aiiiotest.

If Jacobs is awarded the new RAC and they have already demobilized, the for the demobilization would be duplicative costs that would not be recovered through competition since an additional demobilization would be required at the end of the new RAC. The-n standby costs would an additional cost that would defer the demobilization costs until February 2016 when the cotTective action is concluded.

A new contractor would need additional time to procure long-lead time equipment or retrofit contractor-owned equipment. Through trial and enor the contractor would need to learn how to improve its production, which is highly affected by the variability of the sediments. Evidence of this is that the Jacobs team had far lower production rates its first year compared to any other year at the site.

Contrast that to 2014, in which the Jacobs team surpassed any of the previous 10 years in terms of daily production.

12 of17

6. EFFORTS TO OBTAIN COMPETITION:

As stated in paragraph 5, above, Jacobs is the only responsible source available to continue to provide the highly specialized services it developed for the approved Execution Plan. A full and open competition for this action would introduce unacceptable delays in continuing to execute the environmental cleanup of the NBHSS; prolonging human exposure to PCB's and also resulting in a substantial duplication of costs to the Government that would not be expected to be recovered through such competition.

Further competition for the proposed Bridge RAC increase in capacity and ten-month extension of contract duration is not feasible. There is already a full and open competition underway for the award of a new RAC. Mobilizing another contractor before the new RAC is in place would result in unacceptable delays due to the time required to develop new execution plans, and procure and mobilize new equipment and substantial duplication of costs that would not be recovered through competition.

7. ACTIONS TO INCREASE COMPETITION:

The purpose of this proposed action is solely to increase the capacity and ordering period duration of the Bridge RAC. The Bridge RAC was put in place to bridge the gap between expiration of the TERC and execution of the new RAC. To maintain this purpose, an increase in Bridge RAC capacity and extension of the ordering period is needed to encompass the lengthy award time required for the District's corrective action on the new RAC.

Cmrent work is being performed by other contractors at the site including the Water Quality Monitoring, Various Delineation Sampling events, the Operable Unit 3 Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. This work is being accomplished using Profession Services that were awarded through full and open competition to Battelle and Woods Hole Group. 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 annual funding and requirements set forth by the EPA. The new RAC is a full and open competition, utilizing a best value tradeoff acquisition approach. Any new contracts for future work at the NBHSS will be competed as appropriate.

8. MARKET RESEARCH:

A Notice oflntent (NOI) to award a sole source follow-on contract was synopsized on 8 January 2015 and revised and reissued on 23 January 2015. The NOI's were published for the required fifteen days on the Federal Business Oppotiunities website. The responses are discussed in paragraph 9, below.

Of the offerors responding to the new RAC solicitation, none other than Jacobs has the ability to mobilize and implement the approved Execution Plan in time for the 2015 dredge season. As discussed in paragraph 5( c), no other contractor can adopt the EPA approved Execution Plan without modifying it according to their available equipment and expertise. A formal sources sought was not conducted. Market research from the new RAC solicitation indicates that contractors exist that could generally perfonn these remedial services in accordance with an

13 of17

Execution Plan (although not in accordance with the approved Execution Plan). No other contractor could perform the work without unacceptable delay and substantial duplication of cost. This J&A for other than full and open competition will be made publicly available on the Federal Business Opportunities website.

9. INTERESTED SOURCES:

Responses to the NOI were received from two companies. Inner Space Services responded with a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) on 12 January 2015. CuBIC (CB&I and Cashman JV) submitted a response to the 8 January 2015 NOI on 15 January 2015. CuBIC also responded to the 23 January 2015 NOI on 5 Febmary 2015.

Inner Space Services Inc. (ISSI)- The SOQ letter submitted for the 8 January 2015 NOI presents their capabilities to perfonn dredging, dewatering and water treatment. They appear to have the qualifications to perf01m these p01iions of the work. The revised NOI clarified that the work would also include the T &D by rail of TSCA level waste. ISSI did not respond with their capabilities to perf01m the T&D portion of the work. As discussed in section 5(c), above, full and open competition would result in a loss of the 2015 dredge season while a contractor procures and mobilizes all of the required contractor-owned equipment, work plan preparation and approval, and equipment testing prior to start up. During this time no remediation of contaminated sediment would take place resulting in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirement for continuation of dredging in 2015.

CuBIC- The Letter oflnterest (LOI) dated 15 January 2015, presents their capabilities to perform dredging based on their performance of similar work on the Hudson River and a proposal submitted for the new RAC solicitation. CuBIC appears to have the qualifications to perform the work. In their LOI dated 5 Febmary 2015, CuBIC again asse1is their qualifications to perform the work described in the NOI based on the extensive company experience perf01ming similar work and the capability of their team members to perform the same roles.

The LOI states that they have submitted a proposal for RAC for the work in New Bedford. As discussed in Par. 5(b), above, the proposed increase in capacity and extension of the ordering period of the Bridge RAC is needed because waiting for the conclusion ofthe corrective action and final, conclusive award of the new RAC would result in the loss of the 2015 dredge season.

The current Bridge RAC contractor would have to demobilize and remove its equipment from the facilities. A new contractor would have to prepare a new Execution Plan customized to its own equipment, and this Plan would have to be approved. A new contractor would have to procure, install and mobilize all of the required contractor-owned equipment, and conduct equipment and treatment process testing prior to stmi up. The treatment process itself, including the combination of chemicals and their effective and safe application, as indicated in paragraph 5(b ), above, would likely need adjustment before actual production could begin. During this time no remediation of contaminated sediment would take place, resulting in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency's requirement for continuation of dredging and treatment in 2015.

14 of17

10. OTHER FACTS:

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 umestricted procurement. The TERC had a ten-year ordering period, and that expired 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 of the RAC solicitation was rescheduled to early March 2013.

After the terms of the proposed PRP settlement were made public, the decision was made to increase the capacity on the new RAC from $240M to $350M. The cmt·ective action on the solicitation for the new RAC will further delay the award decision to September 2015.

The Bridge RAC capacity is insufficient for a 2015 dredge season. All remaining capacity is reserved for site O&M and demobilization. The ordering period will expire in August 2015.

This J&A is based on the need to increase the Bridge RAC capacity and extend its ordering period, because the Bridge RAC contractor is the only contractor available that can continue to provide highly specialized remedial action services required to implement the NBHSS Execution Plan, without unacceptable delays and substantial duplication of costs that would not be recovered through competition.

15 of17

Control No. NAEIS-15

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

New Bedford Superfund Site U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Contracting Division

New England District March 4, 2015

11. TECHNICAL CERTIFJCA TION:

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 belief.

Name: Maryellen Iorio Date: S J <; J 1..D 1 ~ ·-~t--'-+, ----=---

Projcc' ra:il ~ Signature: ~lJ1!r-"') ~

12. REQUII~~;TIFICATION:

I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance, whi'ch arc included in this justification, arc accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Name: Scott Aconc Date: .:J/5 A-01

Chief, Engineering and Planning Division

Signature:~·

13. FAIR AND REASONABLE COST DETERMINATION:

1 hereby determine that the anticipated cost to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. Proposed prices will be compared to the independent government estimate that has been developed using historic costs for similar projects. Certified cost or pricing data will be requested ifdetennined to be necessary.

14. Contracting Officer Certification:

l c~rtify that this J&A is accurate and complete to the best or my knowledge and belief.

Name: Sheila Winston-Vincuilla Contracting Offic r

Approval

Based on the foregoing, I hereby approve the award of a $58,000,000.00 increase in capacity and· ten month extension of the ordering period of the Bridge Remedial Action Contract, W912WJ- 14-D-0002, held by Jacobs Field Services for the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, New Bedford, MA, on an other than full and open competitive basis pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 2304( c) (1) and FAR 6.302-l(a)(2)(iii),."Only one responsible source and no other supplies oi' services will satisfy agency requirements, 11 subject to the availability of funds and provided the services herein described have otherwise been authorized for the acquisition.

ART A.!~ Date: /tl Aptt• L 2016 Director of Contracting · U.S. A.lmy Corps of Engineers

17 o£17

Attachment 1

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

Prep<ned By: Ellen Iorio 978-31 8-8433

TITLE DATE

Project Manager 16-May-2013 NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO

Qontracting Officer Sheila M. Winston-VIncullfa 978-318"8159

TITLE DATE

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

Technical (6) Ellen Iorio 978-318-8433

TITLE DATE

Project Manager 16-Mav-2013 NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE NO

Requirements (6) Gary Morin 978-318-8232

TITLE DATE

Acting Chief, Mllltary/Envlronmental Project Mgmt Br. 16-May-2013

SIGNATURES ARE REQUIRED BELOW:

Deputy for Small Business (7)

Project Manager* (8) If no PM, use NIA

Office of counsel occrccc Contracting Chf (Type or Print)

Sheila M. Winston-Vincuilla

Field Competition Advocate

SIQN~~· 1:?

NAME (Type or Print) l TC Steven M. Howell

PARC Counsel

NAD NAME (Type or Print) TELEPHONE: NO Scojt Beckstrand -4B+W2-5GS'i 347-370-4515

Justification and Approval for

Other Than Full and Open Competition New Bedford Harbor Supetfund 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 conh·act 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 contr·actor, 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 of ten months for the new RAC Contractor to procure equipment, complete work plans, and mobilize to the site. The current 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) occUlTed 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 cmrent contract is a Total Environmental Remediation Contract (TERC) performed under a Joint Venture (JV) between Jacobs and Tetra-Tech Environmental. Under the business agreement between Jacobs and Tetra-Tech, Jacobs performs all work related to New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site arid Tetra Tech perfonns 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 teimbursable with incentive fee task orders. Cunent funding comes from EPA's Superfund Trust 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 tlu·ough the 1970s by two electrical capacitor manufacturing 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 pmts per million (ppm).

The USACE has been supp01ting EPA on this project since the mid-1980s. The initial site remediation ("the hot spot") was can·ied out in the em·ly 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 ofremGdia1 action which involves the excavation and dredging of approximately 880,000 cubic ym·ds (CY) of PCB contaminated sediment, and mechanically de-watering the sediment for transpmtation 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, AVX Corp. (AVX) 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 cunent 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 from 40 years to approximately eight to ten yem·s. In addition to the environmental and public health benefits, expedited cleanup of the harbor will allow for greater economic development along the Acushnet River and recreational use ofthe 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 stream. The revision to the RAC planning documents has delayed the issuance ofthe 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 tlie S1unmer 2013 but may be delayed by eithe1· 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 Summer of2014. This will leave a gap of approximately one year without a contractor to perform remediation work.

At this time, there are two major project uncertainties: when funding will be received fmm 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 Cotltractor 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 a11ow for approximately 125 days of dredging along with technical suppmt, operation and maintenance of the dewatering and water treatment facilities, enough to be sure we do not lose a dredging season.

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

• Anticipated uncertain funding stream fi:om 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 munerous uncertainties including depth of the contamination, amount of contamination, type ofmaterial (sand versus organics), ammmt of debris to be removed, timing of dredging due to tides, and chatacteristics of waste disposal.

3. Description of Supplies/Services: US ACE was requested by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to clean-up PCB contaminated sediments from New Bedford Harbor. The USACE has been suppmiing 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 cull'ent 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 envimnmental impacts (re-suspension of sediment, spread of contamination).