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

The purpose of this amendment is to respond to requests for information (RFIs) and to provide attachments. All other aspects of this solicitation remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 9

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-Mar-2018

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 W912WJ18R0002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Feb-2018

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-Mar-2018

CODE

U S ARMY ENGR DISTRICT, NEW ENGLAND

696 VIRGINIA RD

CONCORD MA 01742-2751

W912WJ 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912WJ18R0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003 RFI`S

Amendment 0003_________________________________________________________

1. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 3 – Frank Perkins Road: Please provide a description of the current operating treatment system, if it differs from description included in the PWS.

Answer: Design drawings for the Demo 1 Frank Perkins Road treatment system were included as an attachment with the original Solicitation and the O&M manual as an attachment to the Solicitation Amendment 0002.

2. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 3 - JBCC Base Boundary: Is the Current Process Rate confirmed as greater than the Max Process Rate?

Answer: The PWS states “The treatment system has a total maximum process rate up to 50 gallons per minute (gpm). The current operating flow rate is 65 gpm.” The 50 gpm was the design process rate. The system is currently able to run at a higher rate of 65 gpm.

3. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 3 - Demo 1 Off-Base: What is the Current Process Rate of the system?

Answer: The PWS states “The treatment system has a total maximum process rate up to 125 gallons per minute (gpm).” The current operating flow rate is 100 gpm.

4. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 4 - J-1 Range South: What is the Maximum Process Rate of the system?

Answer: The PWS states “• two extraction wells (J1SEW0001 and J1SEW0002) located at the base boundary near existing monitoring well cluster MW-398, operating at 125 gallons gpm” This is the maximum flow rate for the system.

5. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 5 - J-2 Range East - What is the number of IX and GAC vessels and capacity of each for the four (4) MTUs?

Answer: The J-2 Range East system layout was provided in the example monthly O&M reports included with the original solicitation. The See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 16. The information is included in the J-2 Range East system O&M manual.

6. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 6 - J-2 Range North - What is the number of IX and GAC vessels and capacity of each for the two (2) MTUs? What is the Maximum Process Rate of the system?

Answer: The J-2 Range North system layout was provided in the example monthly O&M reports included with the original solicitation. The attachments to Solicitation Amendment No. 0002 included the J-2 Range North O&M Manual and record drawings.

The maximum process rate is 125 gpm per MTU and 250 gpm for the building.

7. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 7 - J-3 Range - What is the number of IX and GAC vessels and capacity of each vessel? What is the Maximum Process Rate of the system? How many wells are in the FS-12 re-injection well network?

Answer: The J-3 Range system layout was provided in the example monthly O&M reports included with the original solicitation. The attachments to Solicitation Amendment No. 0002 included the J-3 Range O&M Manual and record drawings with the FS-12 re-injection well. The design process rate is 250 gpm and current maximum process rate is 255 gpm

8. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 8 - J-1 Range North - What is the Maximum Process Rate of the system?

Answer: The J-1 Range North design process rate is 250 gpm and current maximum process rate is 275 gpm.

9. PWS_Seed_Task Order, Task 9 - CIA - What is the capacity of each IX and GAC vessels for the two (2) MTUs? What is the Maximum Process Rate of the system?

Answer: The CIA systems layout was provided in the example monthly O&M reports included with the original solicitation. The attachments to Solicitation Amendment No.

0002 included the CIA O&M Manuals and record drawings. The maximum process rate is 250 gpm per MTU

10. PWS_Seed_Task Order, General - Please provide all O&M Manuals and As-Built Drawings for all operating systems included in the PWS Seed Task, including all equipment specifications and conveyance piping and well/trench construction details.

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 16.

11. PWS_Seed_Task Order, General - Please provide all Final Decision Documents for each site included in the PWS Seed Task.

Answer: The current Final Decision Documents are attached and included via Solicitation Amendment No. 0003 posted to FBO.

12. Task numbers in Table 1 of the IDIQ does not match up with the Task numbers of the

Seed Task Order. How does USACE want the proposal prepared? A separate section of the Proposal to address IDIQ questions and a separate Section to address the Seed Task Order. All to count towards the 75 page limit cited in the IDIQ section L?

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 53. The ID-IQ PWS included the general project plans and potential activities required for the entire contract. The Offerors proposals should include the tasks listed in the Seed Task Order PWS and Price attachments only and not a separate section with in the required page limit.

13. Laboratories used. Does each laboratory used require to be pre-approved by USACE or is current laboratory accreditation acceptable. Do they need to be approved as part of this submittal?

Answer: The current laboratory accreditation is acceptable provided the proposed laboratories meet the requirements outlined in the PWS and the Generic JBCC QAPP.

14. Task 1.1. Bullet 5. The text makes reference to both a Project Manager (required as key in IDIQ) and a Program Manager which is not defined anywhere in the RFP. Are these two different individuals or the same?

Answer: The intent of the PWS noting a Program Manager is assumption the Project Manager may have some senior corporate support for overall IDIQ contract. Only the Project Manager was noted as a Key Personnel. The Offeror may or may not propose a Program Manager per their corporate structure and judgment on what is needed for response to solicitation. The Price proposal attachments include both labor categories as needed.

15. Task 1.1. Bullet 11. Is the contractor to provide cellular service for the site premises?

Answer: See response to Amendment 0001 RFI Nos. 19 and 23. This is only for system cameras.

16. Task 1.1.1. (Off Base Cameras). How many off-base cameras are there and what are their geological locations/proximity to the site? What kind of cameras are these and what kind of maintenance should we assume? Are these different from the cameras discussed in Bullet 11 above.

Answer: A figure showing the number (14 on base and 1 off base) and approximate location and orientation is attached and included with the Solicitation Amendment No.

0003 posted to FBO. See response to Amendment 0001 RFI No. 23 for available camera specifications. The bullet under Task 1.1.1 assumes maintenance to include replacement of up to 6 cameras. These are the same cameras discussed in Bullet 11.

17. Task 1.3. Is snow loading on the roofs of trailers an issue? What is age and condition of trailers – is leaking and snow loading on roofs an issue.

Answer: Snow loading on roofs is not normally an issue at JBCC/Cape Cod. Snowfall amounts are lower than other parts of New England and temperatures are moderated by vicinity to the ocean. The snowpack does not normally accumulate or remain for long periods of time. The age of each system is noted by the date of the O&M Plans and the current conditions were observed during the site walk on February 13, 2018.

18. Task 2 – Provide the O&M Plan and Environmental Monitoring Plan.

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 16.

19. Are contractors required to include costs for all quantities identified in the Seed Task Order PWS in their firm-fixed price for each O&M task, specifically for carbon and IX resin exchanges, well pump/well motor replacements, and VFD replacements?

Alternatively, should contractors use their professional judgement to establish the required quantities for these fixed-price tasks to achieve the project objectives?

Answer: The Offerors shall include the assumptions for quantities identified in the Seed Task Order PWS in their proposals. Offerors may use professional judgment to propose alternatives; however, these assumptions must be clear and still meet the minimum requirements of the PWS.

20. Is the contractor required to submit a proposed milestone payment schedule or will this be established upon award? If required, where should this be included in the proposal and will it count against the allowable number of pages?

Answer: A milestone payment schedule will be established upon award. Monthly invoicing was utilized on the current IDIQ contract.

21. Under Task 3.1 of the Seed TO, the PWS states: “The Contractor shall make programming changes to batch flow at a higher flowrate through the Frank Perkins Road system”. Please specify the objectives of the programming changes, so contractors can develop an appropriate technical approach and price.

Answer: The intent of this statement was for O&M contractor to be able to make programming changes if necessary to optimize the system performance as noted in PSW.

For the Seed Task Order PWS, the Offerors should not assume programming changes are required for the Frank Perkins Road treatment system.

22. Should Contractors assume completion of an audit of the subcontract analytical laboratory within the Seed TO period of performance?

Answer: No laboratory audit should be assumed during the Seed Task Order period of performance.

23. Is the monthly rate for the radio antennae given in answer to question #19 and the monthly rate for radio rental and maintenance given in #25 separate fees or the fee given covers both?

Answer: The monthly rate given in response Amendment 0001 RFI Nos. 19 and 25 was approximate and inclusive of radio rental and maintenance and antennae.

24. Question #23 and its subsequent answer requires further clarification as to the make and model of the cameras to be replaced.

Answer: See response to Amendment 0001 RFI No. 23. A figure showing the number and approximate location and orientation is attached and included with the Solicitation Amendment No. 0003 posted to FBO.

25. Due to the depth of costing and level of effort to put together a competitive bid, please consider an additional 2 week extension. We understand an extension was already granted, however additional time would be greatly appreciated.

Answer: No additional extension for submission of proposals will be granted.

26. Per your response in Amendment 0001, Question #24, the contractor is to carry the costs of the subscription/administrative fee for DigSafe. However, according to DigSafe, they do not bill to the contractors responsible for mark-out, and would continue to only bill the owner of the utility. So what fees specifically, would you like the contractor to carry, since DigSafe will not bill the contractor?

Answer: This is an administrative fee to receive dig safe tickets that are in the vicinity of existing USACE/IAGWSP utilities so the O&M Contractor can mark out the USACE/IAGWSP utilities (pipelines, monitoring wells, etc.).

27. Please provide the specifications for a typical VFD.

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 16. VFD specifications are included in O&M Manuals.

28. Is our Fee (Profit) to be included in the "Markups" Tab of Attachment 1?

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 8.

29. May the font size in the headers and footers of the proposal be less than 12pt but no less than 8pt?

Answer: No, please follow the SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, Section L of the solicitation. “A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required.”

30. Please confirm Offerors should NOT add headers/footers to the official Government contract forms, such as the SF33 and Section K Representations and Certifications, as these documents become part of the official contract.

Answer: Please follow the SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, Section L of the solicitation. “All pages of each volume shall be numbered consecutively and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer.”

31. Should O&M support for Demo 1 on-base include the base boundary system?

Answer: Yes. Though not specifically noted in Task 3.1 title, the base boundary system was described under Task 3 (Seed Task Order PWS, page 9, second paragraph).

32. How many GAC and IX vessels are included in a “system change out”? In other words, are all vessels changed out or just the lead vessels?

Answer: “Lead” vessels are changed out after breakthrough.

33. When the solicitation describes replacement of a well pump/motor/VFD, should these replacements be considered separate mobilizations for the driller, electrician, and programmer?

Answer: Yes. Since all scenarios can’t be predicted under fixed price contract, the PWS notes the assumptions to be included in the Offeror’s proposal.

34. Does replacement equipment need to be replaced with in-kind equipment?

Answer: Replacement equipment should be per O&M Manual or manufacturer specifications.

35. Do water quality parameters need to be included for system performance samples?

Answer: Yes.

36. What is the required turn-around-time for groundwater analytical?

Answer: Per the QAPP, analytical turnaround time is 21 days for LTM samples.

However, if re-sampling is required due to either field or laboratory issues, a quicker turnaround time may be required. This may also include non-standard sample requests received from the IAGWSP or Agencies and should be included in the contingency assumption effort noted in Seed Task Order PWS Table 4.

37. What is the required turn-around-time for system performance samples (GWTP analytical)?

Answer: See response to RFI No. 36 above.

38. When the solicitation describes a “system” does “system” refer to all systems in an area (i.e. J2 East has 4 treatment containers) or just one treatment container?

Answer: The term system refers to a complete treatment train (depending on treatment system design), i.e., from an extraction well(s), through treatment vessels (GAC and/or IX), to re-injection gallery/well. Each treatment may be described differently and Offerors should reference each system layout in the example monthly O&M reports attached to the original Solicitation and the O&M Manuals and design drawings attached to Solicitation Amendment No. 2. The J-2 East example noted has 3 extraction wells going through 3 mobile treatment units (MTUs) to 2 injection gallery locations.

39. Please provide the GAC and IX vessel sizes for all treatment systems. The solicitation only lists a few?

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 16. Information is included in the O&M Manuals.

40. Please describe the required sampling for the CSA area in more detail. Is the influent, midfluent, and effluent sample or is the expectation to test all sumps prior to processing the water?

Answer: The Seed Task Order PWS states “The CSA GAC system shall be tested at effluent ports every three months for volatile organic compounds, ethylene dibromide, explosives, and perchlorate.” No other samples are currently collected from the CSA.

41. The solicitation describes potential maintenance requirements for the CSA area. What should the bidder assume for required maintenance?

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 107. Minor daily repairs should be included as a contingency. For major repairs, see response to Amendment 0002 RFI Nos.

69 and 91.

42. Per the PWS, the replacement of a number of pumps, motors, and VFD’s are required. Can you please provide make and model number information, so these replacement items may be accurately priced?

Answer: See response to Amendment 0002 RFI No. 16. Information included in the O&M Manuals.

(End of Summary of Changes)