W91ZRU14B0001_Q A_Clarification_34-57.pdf

W91ZRU14B00001_Q&A_Clarification#34-57.xlsx

7/17/2014

Number Question Response

I noticed that this opportunity, W91ZRU-14-B-0001, is listed as a solicitation on FBO, but the verbiage below in the RFP states that a pre-bid conference will be conducted on 01 July 2014 at

02:00 P.M. Can you tell me the status of this opportunity? The IFB solicitation is active and the pre-bid is 01 July 2014 as stated in section 00100, 4.1.

The RFP advertisement specifies this project as a 100% set aside for SBE. Our company is not a small business. Does this set aside preclude us from teaming with small businesses on this project? If teaming is allowed, is there a certain percentage of the total contract value that must be performed by the small business? These set-asides can often be confusing (I recently requested clarification for a Forest Service 100% SBE opportunity and learned that a large business could subcontract to a small business, without restrictions on the percentage of work performed).

IAW FAR 52.219-6(c) General.

(1) Offers are solicited only from small business concerns. Offers received from concerns that are not small business concerns shall be considered nonresponsive and will be rejected.

According to SBA: The word “teaming” is a general term that could mean prime/subcontracting or joint-venture teaming arrangement. Also, the firm has to identify how they are going to “team” in a proposal. Just to say “we will team” is unclear. Under a SBSA, the firm submitting a proposal has to be small under the NAICS code for the requirement. Under a prime/subcontracting, the prime has to be small under the NAICS code and must be able to self-perform per 52.219-14 (50% for services and supplies contracts and 15% under construction/25% specialty construction). Under a joint venture (JV) teaming, both firms have to be small under the NAICS code in order to be able to provide a proposal under a small business set aside acquisition. If a small business JV with a large business, the small business will inherit the large business size and will not qualify for the SBSA. If the JV is from an approved SBA MP, then that may be a different—the exception you were asking about. The protégé is small 8(a) firm and the mentor can be large or small. Again, it has to be approved by

SBA.

I am writing as a potential subcontractor for the above listed solicitation. We would appreciate being considered for support on this SOW.

I recommend that you register for the project on FBO. This will allow you to view other interested parties. You can sign up as an interested party or make contact with other interested parties expressing your interest to sub-contract.

Pg 69 section 7.2 Contractor’s Guarantee: This section appears to be incongruent with type of contract. Whole section, none of this section quite fits. Appears to be a T&M description rather than FFP. Please clarify. See #27

Scope – Excavating: May have missed it someplace, but did not see any backfill spec or stipulation. Are we supposed to backfill? See #42

Bid Schedule says you’ll add everything up, whoever is low wins pending qualifications review.

This forces the contractor to price each site as stand alone, increasing costs such as mob/demob.

Seems to contradict “all items will be awarded”. Which projects will be awarded? See #47

7 Pg 43, 3.1 Working Hours: Are we going to be held to those hours? See #34

8 Pg 60, Table 1 Ground water monitoring: Each site has “x4”. Are we asking for 4 events or 5? See #37 & #45

9 Pg 63, last paragraph: “Executive Order 13423”: Can you provide reference document? http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007-01-26/pdf/07-374.pdf

Pg 54, 34. Time Extensions for unusually severe weather. It looks like the only extension that might be granted. In some sites, water levels are so low on a given year to prevent getting a barge into the sites. Are there any other circumstances for extensions?

The contract identifies unusually severe weather as the only a permissible extension. The period of performance for the contract is five years, the contractor should manage the project schedule and contingencies to prevent situations that impact schedule and performance to include factors such as fluctuating tides, barge schedules, and water levels.

Number Question Response

Pg 57, third para, last sentence: “Contractors should note that “Unforseen environmental issues” include unknown and/or varied concentrations of contaminants at cleanup sites (off-installation areas included) identified in this PWS, but not unknown sites (e.g., sites not identified in this

PWS). Makes no sense, very broad statement which may be appropriate for a T&M, but not fixed price. If the words unknown were removed, it might make better sense. Please clarify.

The Contractor is responsible for review and interpretation of all available information and for the development of requirements necessary to meet the objectives of the contract for all cleanup sites identified in the PWS. The Contractor is responsible for environmental restoration services of all known and unknown contaminants within the cleanup sites.

Pg 61, 4.1 Project Management Plan: “ The PMP, based on the schedule…” Are we required to submit a schedule with our bid? No, however a schedule will be required at the pre-performance conference.

13 If you have to move other buildings and tanks, do you have to put them back?

The contractor is responsible for returning buildings and structures to pre-construction/remediation conditions.

Condition of calculating risk, site risk, remedial action… - TO BE SUBMITTED IN

WRITING. See #46

Quantities for removal at St Mary’s, recommendations were reduced by a factor of 3… -

TO BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING. See #32 & #54

Pg 16, #13 Part 1-Is the qualifications information required with submission of bids? Part 2-Will the low bidder be given a day or two to respond?

Part 1-Reference Section 00100, 13. No, "To establish its responsibility, the apparent low bidder will be requested prior to award…" Part 2-Yes, the low bidder will be given a reasonable period

(5 business days) to provide the information.

Pg 50, 22. Hazardous Materials – Sounds like asbestos might be encountered, Is there anything known about asbestos? And if the building has to be moved, and asbestos is found, do we have to do anything about it? TO BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING. See #38 & #39

Davis Bacon Wage Rates: Current prevailing will be incorporated. Does contractor have an option for subsequent years?

IAW 22.404-1 (a)(1) "A general wage determination contains prevailing wage rates for the types of construction designated in the determination, and is used in contracts performed within a specified geographical area. General wage determinations contain no expiration date and remain valid until modified, superseded, or canceled by the Department of Labor. Once incorporated in a contract, a general wage determination normally remains effective for the life of the contract, unless the contracting officer exercises an option to extend the term of the contract (see 22.404-

12)." There are no options and therefore the wage determination incorporated into the award will remain for the life of the contract.

Pg 59, PWS, Table 1 – Performance objective stipulates NFA, clean-up complete determination. Would clean-up complete determination with Institutional Controls be acceptable? TO BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING See #54

20 Can contractor use Silica gel? TO BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING See #31

All treatment has to be performed off-site. Is it a must? Don’t want to limit options. TO

BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING See #31

22 Tununak – Archeological required, but no excavation? See #50

Well specs – Survivability of groundwater monitoring wells in some sites may be questionable. TO BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING See #37 & #45

Pages 16-17. Following award how much time will the low bidder have to prepare and submit the Qualifications Package? See #16

Page 61 - “Elements of the draft PMP shall be part of the offeror’s proposal submittal”. This is not stipulated as part of the Qualifications Package.

Reference PWS, 4.1 No, "The first draft of the PMP shall be due within thirty (30) calendar days of contact award and shall include a payment milestone plan.

26 Page 61 – Is a separate PMP required for each site? No, only one PMP is required.

Number Question Response

Page 69-70. Contractors Guarantee. Items that require clarification include: a. Bullet 1 – project price does not include the cost of the PMP, insurance, premiums or surplus line taxes. Please confirm., b. Last paragraph – the 80% guarantee limit. Please confirm that this applies.

Part a. - Reference Section 00100, 1.2 "...the Government intends to award a Firm Fixed Price

(FFP) contract…" - Offeror's price shall be all-inclusive. Part b. 80% Guarantee limit does not apply.

28 Page 63. Can you provide Executive Order 13423? See #9

Page 57. Paragraph 3 and statutory responsibility of the Army. Can you confirm that the Army is responsible for unforeseen regulatory issues?

The contractor is responsible and required to adhere to all federal, local, and state laws and regulations. Violation or lack of awareness/inexperience does not warrant an unforeseen environmental issue. An unforeseeable regulation is considered when a change in regulatory statute occurs during the period of performance.

The ROD’s provide the estimates for soil quantities that require removal. If actual soil quantities removed at any site exceed estimated ROD quantities will NGB pay additional?

The Army believes that documentation provided with the solicitation represents the most recent and appropriate documentation available for the Installation and sites identified in this contract.

However, if there is a conflict between this information and other site documentation (the existing reports), the Contractor is solely responsible for reviewing all available information and forming their independent, professional conclusions/interpretation of site conditions and requirements to meet the objectives of this contract.

Records of Decision stipulate off site disposal of impacted soils. Can you confirm that no onsite treatment of soil will be permitted? No on-site treatment is permitted.

Page 59, Sec. 3.0 Performance Objectives and Standards. Why do Alakanuk, Mountain Village, St. Mary’s, and Stebbins require performance requirements of NFA/Clean Up Complete and not

“Achieve clean up levels outlined in Record of Decision” as stipulated for sites requiring groundwater monitoring?

Sites without groundwater contamination are required to obtain No Further Action/ Cleanup

Complete determination without ICs, the clean-up levels are outlined in the ROD. However, sites with groundwater contamination exceeding GW clean-up levels cannot obtain Cleanup

Complete determinations until levels are below the GW clean-up levels therefore, the soil remediation must meet/ achieve Soil Clean-up Levels outlined in the ROD.

Page 74 – 7.8.1 Disclosure. This paragraph stipulates a disclosure statement with the proposal.

Pages 16

27 Offeror’s Qualifications following award does not include a disclosure statement as a required deliverable. Does the apparent low bidder provide the disclosure statement with their proposal or after?

The disclosure statement referenced in this section 7.9 (incorrectly numbered 7.8.1 and 7.8.2) refers to "Organizational Conflicts of Interest". A disclosure statement is not required with the submission of your bid, however prior to award, the apparent low bidder may be requested to provide one within five (5) business days.

Paragraph 3.1 of the PWS (page 43) states that “normal base work hours for the Contractor will be between the hours of 7:00 AM through 4:30 PM, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal

Holidays.” This is a 45-hour work week (assuming one ½ hour break per day). Most of these project sites are in remote locations. It is standard in Alaska to work many more hours when the project is at a remote location (typically 60 to 98 hours per week, with 84 being average). The

Contractor is required to pay overtime rates for any hours over the standard 45-hours listed above.

What is the overtime rate for the Owner’s inspectors? Will the inspectors work a standard remote site workweek at no additional charge to the Contractor? Please clarify this requirement in light of the realities of remote worksites in Alaska.

Part 1-Owner's inspectors overtime rate has no relationship to Contractor schedule.

Part 2-Contractors bid will be firm-fixed price based upon site specific requirements and

Contractor developed schedule. Owner's inspector workweek is not relevant.

Are any of the buildings that may need to be moved to accomplish the work occupied? Is there anything being stored in them?

The Data Gap Analysis as well as the RODS identifies site which contamination exists under the building. Some sites require the building to moved. Most of the buildings contain a compost toilet, toyo stove and small amount of furniture such as chairs and lockers.

The Project Management Plan (page 61, paragraph 4.1) will be “based on the schedule prepared as part of the Contractor proposal.” I do not see a requirement for a schedule to be submitted with the proposal. Please clarify. See #12

Number Question Response

37 How many monitoring wells need to be installed at the sites?

The number of wells needed at each site is to be developed by the contractor based on the Data

Gap Anaylsis and the Record of Decision.

38 Do any of the buildings that we are required to move contain asbestos? The buildings may contain non-friable asbestos in the floor tile.

39 Please clarify asbestos removal requirements for this project. There are no removal requirements.

40 Are any of the buildings to be moved currently on pilings? If so, what kind of pilings?

The armories are sitting on typical Federal Scout Armory triodetic foundations and pilings, the

Data Gap Analysis has illustrations of the structure.

If we are required to excavate contaminated soil from around pilings, are we required to re-engineer the piling load prior to replacement of the building on the piling?

It is the contractor's responsibility to ensure the foundation and building is stable upon the completion of site work.

42 Are there any requirements to backfill the excavations?

The sites are required to be restored to pre-construction/remediation. The contractor is required to backfill the sites.

Could the ARNG please define “restoration” of the site conditions with specific ecological requirements for each location? Is it intended that the site be restored to pre-FSRC conditions?

Backfilling as well as the seed and take of Native Alaska Grass/ vegetation is required to meet performance objectives. The contractor must restore the site to pre-construction/remediation conditions.

It is stated in some the field notes in the RFP documents that 3 rd party site assessment personnel

(CH2M Hill) were lodged at the FSRC sites. Is this lodging also available for the remediation contractor to reduce project costs? If so, what amenities are available at each location? The contractor is not to rely on the FSRC as a source of lodging.

Please define the expectation for Long Term Monitoring for petroleum-contaminated groundwater at the identified FSRC sites. It is stated that, at the sites that require it, Long Term and Institutional Controls (IC’s) should remain in effect until such time as the contamination concentrations in the groundwater meet regulatory requirements. Define “Long Term”.

The contractor is required to meet the outlined GW performance objectives for the duration of the period of performance of the contract. The contractor does not assume "Long Term" monitoring responsibilty after contract close-out. If sites do not obtain GW clean-up levels during the POP of the contract, the AKARNG is required to monitor the sites "Long Term" until

GW clean-up levels are obtained.

For bidding purposes, are contractors to bid remediation efforts based on the recommendations of the 2013 CH2M Hill report, section 8.3?

Reference pg 76, Attachment A: Reference Documents – “The Army believes that documentation provided with the solicitation represents the most recent and appropriate documentation available for the Installation and sites identified in this contract. However, if there is a conflict between this information and other site documentation (the existing reports), the Contractor is solely responsible for reviewing all available information and forming their independent, professional conclusions/interpretation of site conditions and requirements to meet the objectives of this contract. This information is not intended as a substitute for complete analysis of technical data available, nor is it intended to be a guide on how the Contractor should address achievement of the performance objectives/standards.”

The Evaluation for Award (page 13) states that “in the event sufficient funds are not available to award all line items, the Government will determine which line items will be awarded in its best interest.” This requires the contractor to price each site as a completely separate project, which greatly increases the cost of the project. Please provide a ranked order in which the sites will be awarded, to prevent doubling up of mobe and other project costs.

All CLINs will be considered at time of bid opening for purpose of determining low bidder.

Government intends to award all CLINs if sufficient funds are available. If funds are not available to award all CLINs, Government will determine which CLINs can be awarded.

Government assumes each site to be independent of the others.

Number Question Response

48 Is there a requirement to treat soils off-site? See #31

Please confirm that the required cleanup levels for each site are those listed in the appropriate

ROD. See 47

Ref page 57 & 59 of the Solicitation: The scope of work for Tununak includes the requirement to move a building and have Archeological Monitoring. The ROD for Tununak says that no soil remediation is required. What is the intent of requiring a building to be moved and conducting

Archeological Monitoring, if there is no soil remediation or excavation at the site?

Tununak does not require soil remediation however an Archeologist is required to review

Tununak work plans. The building is not required to be moved.

51 Who bears responsibility for long-term security of the monitoring wells?

It is the contractor's responsibility to determine the needed level of security of the wells and enforce.

Reference the middle paragraph on page 63 section 4.4. This paragraph deals with providing

Geospatial Information and Services (GIS) in appropriate formats following appropriate standards. What are the specific GIS deliverables required for this project? The contractor must meet the requirements outlined in AR 115-13 (Attachment 2).

Could the National Guard please confirm that all soil must be transported off-site for treatment or disposal? See #31

For the sites that do not have Groundwater Cleanup Levels (Tununak, Mountain Village, St.

Mary’s, Stebbins), the performance objectives appear to allow for a cleanup complete determination with or without Institutional Controls (ICs). Is this the intent of the performance objective to allow for potential ICs so long as a cleanup complete determination is granted?

For the sites without Groundwater Contamination and only soil remediation, the performance objective is NO institutional controls. Tununak, Mountain Village, St. Mary’s and Stebbins are to be cleaned to Clean-up Complete without ICs.

In reviewing the Data Gap Investigation Reports, it appears that the monitoring wells previously installed during the Data Gap Investigation were removed at the completion of the Data Gap

Investigation fieldwork. Should it be assumed that new monitoring wells need to be installed at the four sites that require long term groundwater monitoring? Does that AKARNG have specifications on the quantity or type monitoring wells that will need to be installed at each site?

New wells will be needed, the contractor must develop the number of wells and develop the specifics for each site utilizing the Data Gap Analysis and RODs.

56 We would like to request an extension to the proposal due date if at all possible.

Government does not find anything significant in the Q&A to warrant an extension of the bid response date.

Regarding question number 34 of the project Q&A: The intent of the question was to find out how much cost I need to include in my bid for the overtime of the Owner's inspectors, because the

Contractor is required to pay for the cost of overtime inspections (see paragraph 3.1, page 43 of the PWS). Part 2 of your answer seems to indicate that the Owner's inspector will not be working overtime, regardless of the hours worked by the Contractor's crew. Should I assume as a basis for bid that the Contractor will not be paying overtime for the Owner's inspectors?

Reference Section 00800 3.1 “Normal base work hours…” is NOT APPLICABLE due to remote site conditions. To clarify, the contractor is not responsible for paying the Government's inspectors overtime.