Public tenders for landscape-planning

Find all Architecture tenders in the world.
Finding business opportunities has never been easier.

Results for architecture. Make a new search!
Architecturelandscape planning

Construction project management services

Stadt Nürtingen – Tiefbauamt | Published March 8, 2017  -  Deadline April 4, 2017
cpvs
71541000, 75131000

In parallel, the additional free space planning and other necessary technical plans are worked or are still to instruct.

The advertised performance includes the project management of the implementation of flood control measures in a framework agreement for a period of 4 years.

Framework Agreement on Services of the largely fully comprehensive project management in support of the city administration Nürtingen for a period of 4 years on the implementation of flood control measures on the Neckar in Nuertingen in 7 subprojects.

Target: Preparation of all requirements formulated sufficient, flood control for the city Nuertingen on time and on budget.

The Contractor shall furnish as part of his assigned power scope of project management all the necessary services for the project and the individual construction projects are provided free of defects and executed within the agreed construction and specified by the customer on budget and completed.

The 7 spaces:

- Area 1: Commercial Zizishausen and Au.

- Area 2: Alleestraße / Wörthstraße,

- Area 3: B313 / Oberensingen,

- Area 4: Mill Road,

- Area 5: Untersinger road / Oberensinger road,

- Area 6: Nürtinger road Neckarhausen,

- Area 7: At the Autmut.

The City reserves the right work itself conduct or allocate (for special requirements) to third parties:

define goals, conflict resolution, establishing the specific programs)

B. in the preparation of business plan and resource needs messages)

- Scheduling and cost monitoring and control of individual projects and the overall project,

- Contract management,

B. for projects funded)

- Coordinator discussions, roundtables, Jour-Fix construction etc.,

- Assistance in Ausschreibe- and procurement,

- Participation in the publicity.

These include:

- Nürtingen with Mayor / steering group / council, mayor, Tiefbauamt, Stadtkämmerei, Bauverwaltungsamt, urban planning, Press / Public Relations, Environmental Officer, Ordnungsamt / disaster / flood protection, estate administration, Office of Audit.

- Landratsamt Esslingen with conservation, volunteer nature conservation officers, groundwater and soil protection, water law.

- Stuttgart Regional Council as a water authority Landesbetrieb waters and funding body.

- Planning offices for the collection and planning of engineering structures, open spaces, transport planning, landscape planning, consulting geotechnical engineering, consulting ordnance disposal, surveying, environmental.

- Inclusion of residents and population.

Therefore, everything listed here with regard to the promotion to be carried out.

From AG is assumed that the designated personnel, in particular the project, is available over the entire contract period and is that provided him the essential part of the required services.

The extent of the expected annual working moves estimate of the contracting authority in a range from 100 to 220 days, depending on the number and status of the individual subprojects.

Reconstruction and expansion of the water treatment plant in the town of Brzóza, village Glowaczow.

 | Published September 8, 2014  -  Deadline September 23, 2014
cpvs
45252120, 45232150, 45232430, 45332200

A detailed description of the contract is contained in the documentation which is attached to this ToR: - Design of architectural - engineering - construction project - the executive part of the technological - Sanitary - Landscape planning - Detailed Technical Specifications Performance and Acceptance of Construction Works, Object of the contract includes : Reconstruction and expansion of the water treatment plant in the town of Brzóza, municipality Głowaczów: 1) Construction Technology (including plumbing, piping) - submersible pump raw water pipeline, discharge and suction line - internal installations plumbing. - External technological sewer - Technology Station - Installation of ventilation, -zbiornik retention - generator 2) Construction - demolition works, -very zero - raw state - the state of finishing, - settler backwash water - septic tank - the foundation for reservoir, - fencing - rigid pavements. 3) Electrical works - outdoor lighting - power submersible pump - internal installations - Installation of lightning. In addition, under this contract the Contractor at his own expense is required to: - give a minimum of 3 years warranty for the completed construction works and used to perform the contract materials and construction products - make documentation as-built surveying inventory and return it to the Employer within 30 days of the date of receipt of the work. - Subject of the order should be made of new materials and products for which the Contractor shall provide certificates or certificates of release to service for each request supervisor and forward them to the Purchaser on the date of receipt of the order - after completion of the works, but before the date of their receipt, should organize children's building and return it in good condition, no worse than before the commencement of works, 4 Provisions relating to the project documentation: 1) The Contractor shall comply with the subject of the contract in accordance with the design documentation and as indicated by the designer of technology and in accordance with the principles of technical knowledge, standards, terms of technical execution and delivery of the works, indicated the Employer and the applicable regulations. 2) The Contractor is required to read the project documentation and submit in writing spotted errors or deficiencies that may affect the proper execution of the contract. 3) In case of circumstances render it necessary to make changes in the design documentation Contractor shall notify the Purchaser in writing of this fact within three days from the date of occurrence of / in the circumstances. Do not allow the submission of a tender providing a different way than the performance of the contract specified in the design documentation. 5 The provisions for the implementation of the agreement: Documentation is available in room 12 at the Purchaser. 2) If the design documentation and in the order specification product names used to indicate the manufacturer of the contracting authority permits the use of products equivalent to the corresponding technical parameters specified in the documentation. 3) The Contracting Authority recommends that the Contractor has made the vision of the local terrain, covered by future construction work under this object of the contract in order to familiarize yourself with the terms of the works. 4) Transfer of the site - will take place in the presence of the Contractor, the Contracting Authority and the Supervisor at a time agreed by the parties. 5) The Contractor shall notify the Purchaser in writing of the circumstances which may affect the failure to date of implementation of the contract no later than 7 days from the date of occurrence of / in the circumstances. 6) All cables underground encountered Contractor shall secure. In the event of damage, immediately so notify the Employer, the Superintendent and other stakeholders, and to repair the damage at his own expense. 7) carried out construction work must comply with building regulations, health and safety, fire., Sanitary and environmental regulations, under the supervision of persons who have the power to conduct the work. 881). The Contractor shall be fully liable for any damage caused to third parties as a result of works, from the building site. Subcontracting: 6.1. Employer allows the participation of subcontractors in the implementation of the contract. 6.2. Employer requires the indication by the Contractor in the tender part of the contract he intends to subcontract or a statement of no employment contractors (according to the model annexed to the Form for quotation - est. No. 1 to the ToR). 1 of the Act. 1 of the Act, the Contractor is obliged to prove to the contracting authority that proposed another subcontractor or contractor alone

8000-new building at Geomatikum 733-new building at Geomatikum When Schlump / corner of Federal Street, 893-Structural Engineering

GMH | Gebäudemanagement Hamburg GmbH | Published May 24, 2014
Winner
Leonhardt, Andrä und PartnerStadtdeich 5Hamburg 20097
cpvs
71310000

- Background: the target was set by the Senate of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, to subject the structures of the construction and building management of the University Campus on the main road in Hamburg future of a fundamental reorganization. "New building at Geomatikum", "MIN Forum + computer science" and "Geomatikum", as well as the external operation over a period of 30 years provided: where the new construction and renovation services amCampus federal highway are to be implemented in three phases. Forthe reorganization of the construction and building management is aimed at a tenant-landlord model, both of the partners takes the financing and construction and operation including maintenance and rental andie universities on behalf of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg. Against the background that a Public-Public Partnership (ÖÖP) for this project by dieFreie and Hanseatic City of Hamburg is preferred, was established in November 2011, a Memorandum of Understanding (Letter ofIntent) with the GWG Commercial (after renaming on 1.1.2013 GMH - Building Management Hamburg GmbH ) signed. The advertised power here "Structural engineering" refers only to the first phase of "new building at Geomatikum" (NaG). - Project "building at Geomatikum": The entire area Campus Federal Street was already in the first competition of urban planning überplantund should evolve by stepwise new buildings and alterations to a modern, city partially integrated campus on. In addition to realizing the growing land requirements of the University sichder to campus open to the district and allow coexistence and cooperation between teaching, research, housing undöffentlichem life. In chronological order are to be built unddann the corresponding old stock demolished or modernized successively until the new buildings. As a first step towards the restructuring of the University of Hamburg is a high priority of the new amGeomatikum with the integrated cluster of excellence CliSAP on the grounds of federal road / When are Schlumpumgesetzt. The seven-storey building with a polygonal plan on an urban plot has approx 42,000 m² GFA and approx 190 000 m³ gross and involves very complex uses vibration-free laboratory faces for example, special laboratories, magazines, offices and aquariums. The dimensions are approximately 80 x 35 m for denBüroteil and about 80 x 65 m for laboratory / office part. The parapet height measures approximately 29.7 m. The new building is adjacent other via the Geomatikum Skyscraper on (height> 60 m) from the 60s. On the tree population sowieein adjacent listed building consideration must be taken. The cost, according to preliminary cost calculation amounts to approximately EUR 140 million gross (KostengruppenKG 200-700). - Basis of Design: The basis for planning the present, completed design plans for: - Structural design, performance, phase 3 of Annex 13 (on § 49) HOAI 2009 - buildings, power phase 3 of Annex 11 (on § 33) HOAI 2009 - Technical equipment, power phase 3 of Annex 14 (on § 53) HOAI 2009 - Landscape planning, performance stage 3 of Appendix 11 (at § 38) HOAI 2009 - Mission: The power image for the structural design includes the basic services of the phases 4, 5 and 6 reinvested, 14 (on § 51) HOAI 2013 According to current knowledge the following special services are in addition:. evidence of fire resistance of structural members vonFassadenverkleidungen proof of stability, studies of the excavation pit, assisting in the testing and evaluation of alternative tenders, Engineering controls of reinforcement before concreting Using the services to start is by appointment in the 4th quarter of 2013.

80000, 733 - new building at Geomatikum When Schlump / corner of Federal Street, 20146 Hamburg, 893 - Structural Design, GMH 077th

GMH | Gebäudemanagement Hamburg | Published August 24, 2013  -  Deadline September 25, 2013
cpvs
71327000

- Background: the goal was set by the Senate of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, in the future be subject to the structures of the construction and building management of the University Campus on the main road in Hamburg, a fundamental reorganization. "New on Geomatikum", "MIN Forum + computer science" and "Geomatikum", as well as the external operation over a period of 30 years provided: where the new construction and renovation services at the campus main road in three phases be realized. For the reorganization of the construction and building management, a tenant-landlord model is sought, in which the partner takes over the financing and construction as well as operation and maintenance including lease to the universities on behalf of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg. Against the background that a public-public partnership (ÖÖP) for this project by the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg is preferred, in November 2011, a Memorandum of Understanding (Letter of Intent) with the GWG Commercial (after name change on 1.1.2013 GMH - Building Management Hamburg GmbH) signed. The advertised performance here "Structural engineering" refers only to the first stage of "building at Geomatikum" (NaG). - Project "building at Geomatikum": The entire area of ​​campus road was planned urban development already in the first competition and should evolve gradually through new construction and alterations to a modern, integrated district-campus on. Besides the realization of the growing needs of the area, the University campus is open to the district and allow coexistence and cooperation between teaching, research, housing and public life. To be successively until the new buildings built and then demolished the corresponding old stock or modernized in chronological order. As a first step towards the restructuring of the University of Hamburg will be implemented with the integrated cluster of excellence CliSAP on the area road / When Schlump high priority of the new building at Geomatikum. The seven-storey new building has a polygonal floor plan on an inner-city land 42 000 m² gross floor area and about 190 000 m³ gross and involves very complex uses such as vibration-free laboratory space, special laboratories, magazines, offices and aquariums. The dimensions are approximately 80 x 35 m for the office part and about 80 x 65 m for laboratory / office area. The parapet height measures approximately 29.7 m. The new building is adjacent to the high-rise at Geomatikum (height> 60 m) from the 60s. The valuable trees and a neighboring listed building must be taken into consideration. The cost of preliminary costing amounted to EUR 140 million gross (cost groups KG 200-700). - Basis of Design: The basis for planning the present, completed design plans for: - Structural design, performance, phase 3 of Annex 13 (on § 49) HOAI 2009 - buildings, power phase 3 of Annex 11 (on § 33) HOAI 2009 - technical equipment, power phase 3 of Annex 14 (on § 53) HOAI 2009 - landscape planning, performance stage 3 of Annex 11 (on § 38) HOAI 2009 - Mission: The performance image for the structural design includes the basic services of the phases 4, 5 and 6 of Annex 14 (on § 51) HOAI 2013. According to current knowledge, the following special services are in addition: Detection of the fire resistance of structural components, verifying the stability of facade cladding, investigations into the excavation, assisting in the testing and evaluation of alternative offers, engineering technical control of reinforcement before concreting With the services is by appointment in 4 . Quarter to begin 2013.

C--Architect and Engineering Services for the Design of the Ohio River Greenway Public Access, Indiana

Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Published June 20, 2008  -  Deadline July 21, 2008
cpvs

TITLE: A/E Services for the Ohio River Greenway Public Access, Indiana Project . 1. CONTRACT INFORMATION: The Louisville District plans to procure a contract for the Indiana Greenway design, engineering, architectural, and planning services that may include site investigation, planning studies, engineering studies, design development, final design, and the preparation of construction documents, in addition to construction phase services. The proposed services will be obtained by a negotiated firm fixed price contract. This is a civil works project. This is a competitive unrestricted procurement under NAICS 541330, open to participation by both large and small businesses to be eligible for contract award. A firm must be registered in the DoD Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database, via the CCR Internet site at http://ccr.gov. For further questions and/or concerns, please contact CCR Assistance at 888-277-2423, or Electronic Commerce Information Center (ECIC) at 800-334-3414. This announcement is open to all firms, regardless of size. If a large business is selected, the firm will be required to present an acceptable Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 19.7 prior to award of the contract. The current subcontracting goals are 70.0% to Small Business, 6.2% to Small Disadvantaged Business, 7.0% to Women-Owned Small Business, 9.8% to HUBZone Small Business, 3.0% to Veteran-Owned Small Business, and 0.9% to Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business. These percentages are applied to the total amount of subcontracted dollars. 2. PROJECT INFORMATION: The project area is approximately 7 miles long , and extends from New Albany thru Clarksville and into Jeffersonville, Indiana along the shoreline of the Ohio River. The northern boundary is generally the levee/floodwall and the southern boundary is the Ohio River. The first phase of the project is expected to consist of the design of approximately $5,000,000 worth of construction and is anticipated to begin in September 2008 and be complete by May 2009. Additional work may eventually increase the value of the overall project to $26,000,000. Services will consist of, but not be limited to, greenway planning and engineering services support. Responding firms should have personnel capable of performing work in the following areas: 1) environmentally sustainable greenway planning and design; 2) road design; 3) design of pedestrian and bicycle trails; 4) site work including planning, grading, and drainage; 5) landscape planning and design; 6) hydrologic and hydraulic analyses; 7) rest areas and overlooks 8) design of small buildings (stand alone, unheated or heated; e.g. restrooms, etc.) 9) environmental restoration; 10) design of promenades and water edge treatments; 11) design of streambank protection; 12) lighting and electrical design; 13) site surveying; 14) geotechnical activities (soils engineering); 15) structural analysis and design (levee cuts, small bridges, etc.); 16) utility analysis and design for certain features; 17) construction cost estimating using the Micro-Computer Aided Cost Estimating System (MCACES); 18) operating in a CADD or GIS environment using ARC-Info, ARC-view, and GeoMedia and Microstation; 19) Public Involvement/Awareness Workshops and 20) other A/E studies related to the above. 3. SELECTION CRITERIA: Specific requirements for this project are as follows and must be identified in the SF 330. Submittals will be evaluated against the general evaluation factors listed in descending order of importance. Items (a) (e) are primary selection criteria, (f) (g) are secondary criteria. a) Professional Qualifications: Professional qualifications of the key management and technical personnel to include appropriate education, training, registration/certification, longevity with the firm, and overall and relevant experience for the following personnel must be documented in the resumes. Two resumes are required for the following fields (a designer and checker): civil, sanitary, structural (independent of civil), hydraulic/hydrologic, geotechnical (soils engineering), mechanical, electrical, and environmental engineering; architecture; and landscape architecture. Each discipline must have at least one registered professional in each field. In addition, a resume for community/urban planner must be submitted. b) Specialized Experience: Specialized experience and technical competence in the expected activities identified in Paragraph 2, Project Information above, as evidenced by the resumes of the key personnel to be assigned to this project, as well as that of the firm. In addition, a brief Design Management Plan, including an explanation of the firms management approach, management of subcontractors (if applicable), quality control procedures, and an organizational chart showing the inter-relationship of management and various team components (including subcontractors) must be included in the SF 330. c) Environmentally sustainable Greenway experience: Knowledge and experience in urban waterfront and greenway related work along rivers in the central United States. d) Capacity: Capacity to complete the work in the required time (if a branch office, must have capacity to perform independently of the main office). e) Past Performance: Past performance on DoD and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality control, and compliance with performance schedules. f) Knowledge of the locality of the project, to include geologic features, environmental and climatic conditions and local building codes. g) Extent of Participation: Extent of participation in small businesses (including women-owned), and small minority institutions in the proposed contract team, measured as a percentage of the total estimated effort. 4. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit one paper copy and one electronic copy on one CD of the SF 330, Part I, and one paper copy of SF 330, Part II, for the prime firm. Each branch office that will have a key role in the proposed contract must also submit a copy of the SF 330 Part II. Responding firms must submit a current and accurate SF 330, Part II, for each proposed consultant. The proposal shall be submitted as one file using Microsoft Word (.doc) or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf). Font size shall be 10 or larger. Any firm with an electronic mailbox responding to the solicitation should identify such address in the SF 330, Part I. Please identify the Dun & Bradstreet number of the office(s) performing the work in Block 5b of the SF 330, Part I. Dun & Bradstreet numbers may be obtained by contacting 1-866-705-5711, or via the internet at www.dnb.com. The SF 330 will be no longer than 100 pages in length (excluding the SF 330, Part IIs) and Block H will be 20 pages or less in length. Each printed side of a page will count as one page. Release of firm status will occur within 10 days after approval of any selection. All responses on SF 330 to this announcement must be received no later than 4:00 p.m. Louisville local time, on 21 July 2008. No other information including pamphlets or booklets is requested or required: No other general notification to firms under consideration for this project will be made. Facsimile transmissions will not be accepted. Solicitation packages are not provided and no additional project information will be given to firms during the announcement period. Submit responses to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District, ATTN: Gloria Ritter, CT-C, 600 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Place, Room 821, Louisville, KY 40202-2230.

Architectural Services for Master Planning

Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) | Published May 16, 2017  -  Deadline June 30, 2017
cpvs

(REQUEST FOR SF330s) The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an agency of the Department of Commerce is seeking qualified Architect-Engineering (AE) firms to submit Standard Form 330 (SF330) Architect / Engineer Statement of Qualifications for Architectural Services for Master Planning and other Associated pre-planning services for NIST facilities located nationwide. Facilities locations are Fort Collins, CO, Kekaha, HI; Boulder, CO and Gaithersburg, MD.The Architect Engineer firm shall assist NIST in providing professional services including all labor and material as required for master planning, programming, concept studies, space utilization studies, feasibility studies, cost estimating, business case analyses, environmental planning and analyses, site planning studies, security studies, cultural resources planning and support activates campus infrastructure planning, campus signage and 3-D mapping/model. Requirements will vary for each individual Task Order and will be defined by separate scopes of work.CONTRACT INFORMATION: The Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts will be for one base year from the date of award with options to extend the term of the contracts for four (4) additional one year periods to be exercised at the discretion of the Government, or until the maximum contract amount of $15,000,000.00 awarded across all IDIQs is reached, whichever is earlier.Each contract awarded will have a guaranteed minimum order of $10,000.00 for the total of the base year and all option years. The minimum value of any individual Task Order is $10,000.00 with a maximum Task Order value of $1,700,000.00. Each specific IDIQ Task Order shall be separately negotiated based on the A/E effort involved.SET-ASIDE INFORMATION: This procurement is a 100% set-aside for Small Business Architect Engineering firms. The primary North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code is 541310, Architectural Services. The Government intends to make a minimum of two (2) awards to qualified small business, but reserves the right to contract with more or fewer firms per the best interest of the Government. Offerors submitting a qualification package must have an active and valid registration in the System for Award Management (www.sam.gov). The awarded contracts will be firm-fixed price Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ).Firms submitting qualification packages must comply with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.236.25 Requirements for Registration of Designers Whereby Architects and Engineers must be registered to practice in the professional field involved in a State (the full text of the clause can be read at http://www.aquisition.gov). This procurement will follow the procedures established in the Brooks Act, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15, FAR 36.6. The selection process will consist of the initial evaluation of the SF-330s' and determination of the highest rated firms. The highest rated firms will be invited to continue to the interview process. All firms not selected will be notified. Firms selected to move forward will participate in the interview/oral presentation process, after the conclusion of interviews the top ranked firms will receive the solicitation for pricing and conduct negotiations. SELECTION CRITERIA'SThe evaluation factors listed below shall be addressed in Part H of the SF-330.Offerors requesting consideration are required to submit a current Standard Form 330 (Rev. 8/2016). Responses shall not exceed 60 pages (each side of a paper counts as a page) in length. Offerors responding are requested to clearly indicate those required services it intends to self-perform and those it intends to subcontract. NIST shall evaluate each potential offeror in terms of its (importance of factors in descending order):1. Specialized experience and technical competence of the offeror and its proposed subcontractors performing facilities planning services within the past seven years.a. The offeror shall describe its proposed experience and subcontractors experience performing conceptual design studies, master planning of a campus greater than 50 acres, facility feasibility studies for a new or existing building, and programming, planning, and/or design of research facilities.b. The offeror shall also describe its experience working with its proposed subcontractors and key personnel.c. The offeror shall describe its technical competence in Federal sustainable design and energy conservation programs and proven success in achieving energy efficiency in facility planning design. 2. Professional qualifications of the offeror and its proposed subcontractor and key personnel, based upon projects completed within the last seven years.a. The offeror shall describe its professional qualifications and those of its proposed team (proposed subcontractors and key personnel). b. The offeror shall identify the roles of its key personnel by providing resumes for its proposed key personnel (i.e.: Principal, Senior Architect, Project Manager, Interior Designer, Analyst/Planner Programmer, Space Planner, Urban/Campus Planner) that include credentials, education, registrations, relevant experience, and the role to perform NIST's requirements. 3. Offeror's recent past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private industry, similar to that described herein, in terms of cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules. The offeror shall provide at least one reference for itself and its proposed subcontractors, as appropriate, for each project included in the SF-330. Under SF-330 Part I. Item F. 23 (Owner Information) reference's contact information must include valid phone number and e-mail address.4. Capacity of the offeror and proposed subcontractors to accomplish the work within the required time frame.a. Current and planned workload - The offeror shall describe it and its subcontractors current and planned one (1) year workload.b. The offeror shall demonstrate its ability to comply with FAR 52.219-14, which requires at least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel be expended for employees of the small business concern; and5. Location of the firm within the general geographical area of the NIST main campus in Gaithersburg, MD., and/or the campus in Boulder, CO, as well as a. knowledge and experience with the local governing bodies and related agencies b. for the Gaithersburg campus include demonstrated knowledge and experience with submissions to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC). The selected offerors will be invited to present their qualifications in person to the Evaluation Board. All selected firms shall be provided with a Scope of Work, Interview Questions, and a description of the oral presentation evaluation factors. All offerors will be given approximately (7) calendar days to prepare for their interview presentations. Selected offerors will be evaluated and ranked by order of preference based upon presentations/interviews.After the interview presentations are concluded the offerors will be evaluated and the top-ranked offerors will be selected, sent solicitations, and subsequent negotiations to follow. Award selections will be made based on the results of the interview presentations and the SF-330 qualifications.PROJECT INFORMATIONThe following describes NIST's requirements for services from the Architect(s). Although NIST may require the Architect(s) to perform services at any of the NIST sites, the Gaithersburg and Boulder campuses will serve as the predominant locations for the services. 1. Master Planning - Urban design and campus planning services for the development and updating of NIST Master Plans. Also included is the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement for each Master Plan to satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 2. Programming - Program of Requirements (POR) that accurately reflects spatial, functional and operational requirements for a specific program or organization. Applying space standards approved by NIST, and utilizing questionnaires/interviews, the POR will articulate space needs, adjacency requirements, operational and performance requirements, as well as site and security requirements. 3. Space Utilization Studies - Comprehensive space analysis including organizational distribution of space (space assignments), overall space occupied by each organization, identification of support space, joint use space, space types, utilization rates by space, building, and organization. Provide space consolidation strategies and recommend more efficient utilization of space. 4. Concept Studies - Conceptual architectural design studies for new facilities and renovations. Mechanical, electrical, plumbing, structural, and site/civil and landscape planning shall be included as required. 5. Feasibility Studies - Existing building analysis and condition assessment including the capacity of the facility to meet the programmatic requirements. Architectural, engineering, infrastructure and site systems shall be included. 6. Cost Estimating - Concept level project budget estimates, detailed program or project cost estimates, life-cycle cost estimates (identification of all cost elements from initial concept through operations, support, and disposal). 7. Business Case Analyses (Cost Benefit Analyses) - Comparative analysis that presents facts and supporting details among competing alternatives. It considers life-cycle costs as well as quantifiable and non-quantifiable benefits. 8. Environmental Planning and Analyses (NEPA compliance and documentation) - Project, program, or site-wide environmental analysis to determine NEPA compliance level (Categorical Exclusion, Environmental Assessment, Environmental Impact Statement), and accompanying documentation. 9. Transportation Planning & Studies - Specialized studies regarding all modes of transportation at a project level, within a NIST site, a NIST site related to the surrounding community and environment, and/or on a regional level as it pertains to NIST. 10. Site Planning Studies - Specialized site studies pertaining to a portion of a NIST site, or a specialized campus wide study including landscaping, signage, land use, natural resources, etc. 11. Space Planning - Space planning for office, laboratory, and support spaces. 12. Security Studies - As related to physical facility or campus security analysis and design. 13. Cultural Resource Planning and Support Services - Specialized studies and/or support for NHPA Section 106 Consultations. NHPA Section 110 survey work related to both above and below ground resources. 14. Campus Infrastructure Planning - Site utility systems including, but not limited to, steam, condensate, chilled water, domestic water, sanitary, electrical, IT, and security systems. Investigations and planning of campus distribution systems site-wide or for specific portions of the site. 15. Campus Signage, including wayfinding, gate signage, kiosks and building identification signs 16. Campus Mapping, including 3-D mapping All submissions must include a completed Standard Form (SF) 330, Architect/Engineer Qualifications. The SF330 shall not exceed a total of 60(each side of a sheet counts as one page) in a common font, size 12, single spaced. Use graphic presentations where such use will contribute relevant data. Page size 11"x17" may be used for graphics and charts.The background color of each page of the submission shall be white or ivory stock only. A page is defined as each face of an 8.5 X 11-inch sheet of paper containing information. Deliver via US Mail, FedEx, UPS, etc. (or hand-deliver) the original SF330 and three (5) copies to The National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST) 100 Bureau Drive, building 301 Room B112 (Mail Stop 1640), Attn: Gina Lee, Gaithersburg, MD 20899). DEADLINES: Request for Information (RFI): Offerors deadline to submit RFI's is by 1:00pm on June 1, 2017. RFI's are to be directed only via email to Gina Lee at gina.lee@nist.gov and copy Sandra Smith at sandra.smith@nist.gov. The Government response will be posted no later than June 8, 2017.Offerors shall submit, one original and five (5) copies of the SF330, proof that AE firm is permitted by law to practice the professions of Architect or Engineering (ex: state registration number,) qualification packages must be received at the address cited above no later than June 30, 2017, 1:00pm Eastern Standard Time to be considered.

C--Small Business Set-Aside Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services within the Northwestern Division (MEGA Phase A)

Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Published August 1, 2011  -  Deadline October 4, 2011
cpvs

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for A-E Services. FAR Subpart 12.6 DOES NOT apply. 1. Contract Information: The Northwestern Division (NWD) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a requirement to acquire Architect-Engineer (A-E) Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW)/Environmental Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for execution of its environmental mission. This contract acquisition is part of NWD's Phase A of the Multiple Environmental Government Acquisition (MEGA). These regional A-E contract acquisitions will be conducted in accordance with Public Law 92-582, the Brooks Act, and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6 and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 236.6. The majority of the work will be located within the NWD (including Kansas City, Omaha, and Seattle Districts). In support of this effort, the Government intends to award contracts to three (3) Small Business (SB) firms sharing $20 million in total contract capacity. However, if the Contracting Officer determines during the selection process that fewer or more than three (3) contracts should be awarded, based upon the selection criteria, the Contracting Officer has the discretion of adjusting that number, or awarding none at all. The period of performance for each contract will include a base period of three (3) years and one option period of two (2) years. It is anticipated that the contracts will be awarded not earlier than December 2011. Task orders will be issued as the need arises during the contract period. Task order assignments will be determined with consideration of each firm's experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity. These task orders may be either firm fixed-price or cost reimbursable type orders. The period of performance on individual task orders shall not exceed five (5) years. Firms receiving award will share an ordering amount of $20 million over the life of the contracts. The NAICS Code for this procurement is 541330 -- Engineering Services. For the purposes of this procurement a concern is considered a small business if its average annual gross receipts are $4.5 million or less. More than one contract will be awarded for the same scope of work. Under the Brooks Act, price competition is not allowed for A-E contracts. When a requirement is identified, the government will first determine if it is a new requirement or a follow-on effort to an existing HTRW/environmental project. Due to the nature of the requirements, projects are completed in phases such as preliminary assessment, remedial investigation, feasibility study, and then design. If a follow-on requirement, determination of the selected A-E will be conducted considering a firm's experience, qualifications, capability, and capacity to perform the work. For new requirements, the project scope will be reviewed to determine whether the requirement can be accomplished using a firm fixed-price task order or whether uncertainties will require the use of a cost reimbursable task order. Experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity will be considered to determine which firm is best qualified to accomplish the work. The period of performance for the IDC will begin on the date of contract award and will be in effect for the three (3) year base period; in addition there is a provision for one two (2) year option period; if the option period is exercised, the length of the contract will be five (5) years. The period of performance for task orders awarded under the IDCs will be determined based upon the work requirement (not to exceed five (5) years) and will be included in the task order solicitation and negotiated award documents. The Service Contract Act of 1965, as Amended, is applicable to this solicitation and resulting contracts and will be incorporated into same. Service wage rates will be determined relative to the employee's office location rather than the location of work. To be eligible for contract award, a firm must have a DUNS number from Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) and be registered in the Department of Defense (DoD) Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet site at http://www.ccr.gov or by calling 1-866-606-8220. D&B can be reached by calling 1-866-705-5711. Firms are also required to use the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). ORCA is a web-based system that centralizes and standardizes the collection, storage, and viewing of many of the representations and certifications required by the FAR and previously found in solicitations. Detailed information can be found in the Help section of the ORCA website at http://orca.bpn.gov. The help section includes ORCA background information, frequently asked questions (FAQ), the ORCA Handbook, and whom to call for assistance. Additionally, in accordance with FAR Part 22.1303, all firms must complete their VETS-100 report. Information can be found at the Department of Labor website http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm, or call the service center at 1-866-237-0275; you will be asked to provide your company name, employer identification number (EIN), and DUNS number. 2. Project Information: Firms must be capable of performing work on a wide variety of HTRW/environmental sites in a manner that complies with federal, state, and local regulations and laws, and within time frames required. A majority of the work to be performed is expected to be for HTRW/environmental projects in NWD. Specific needs will be determined based upon project requirements as described in each task order. Project assignments will typically require performance on-site and in an office setting. Assignments will include, but not be limited to: site investigations, subsurface exploration, chemical sampling, testing and analyses, hazard evaluations, feasibility and other engineering studies and reports, archaeological investigations and mitigation, wetlands determination and mitigation studies, groundwater and other modeling, contaminant fate and transport analysis, HTRW remedial designs, preparation of plans and specifications, cost estimating, value engineering screenings and studies, field inspections, verification of existing conditions, pilot studies, surveying and mapping, community relations, construction-phase services (engineering design during construction, checking shop drawings), evaluations of green technologies and energy conservation measures, and other related services. Selected firms will work on a variety of hazardous waste and other environmental projects, including, but not limited to: contaminated soil and groundwater, contaminated sediments, radioactive and mixed wastes, underground storage tanks and fueling systems and habitat restoration and mitigation. For on-site investigations, firms must provide personnel with current health and safety training, as required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 3. Selection Criteria: (A) Selection of the firms will be based on the following primary criteria, listed in descending order of importance: (1) Specialized experience and technical competence of the firm's team demonstrated during the past five (5) years in the broad range of environmental work required for this contract including (a) Investigation, planning, design, and construction phase services for a variety of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste cleanup projects. Experience must demonstrate wide-ranging capabilities for diverse projects with differing contaminants in various media. (b) Knowledge of and adherence to regulations and practices pertaining to hazardous waste sampling, handling, transportation and disposal including Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), and (National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). (c) Oversight of Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, Remedial Action, and Long Term Response Action projects performed by other parties, in conformance to their respective consent decrees or administrative orders negotiated with EPA; (d) Demonstrated quality management procedures. The effectiveness of the proposed project team (including management structure, coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) will be considered within quality management; (e) Capability in managing cost-reimbursable contracts/task orders. The prime A-E firm will demonstrate adequate experience with a cost accounting system for cost-reimbursable contracts/task orders. Firms will be evaluated for the degree in which their team possesses experience and competence in these areas (a through e, above). The most highly qualified firms will have extensive experience in all of these areas; (2) Professional qualifications of a firm's staff and team consultants to be assigned to this contract. The education, training, registration, proposed job title, overall and relevant experience, longevity with the firm, and experience of personnel working together with key management and other technical personnel will be considered. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion below. Responding firms should demonstrate the professional qualifications of their staff in these primary disciplines, which are listed in descending order of importance. List professional registrations, if applicable, for the key disciplines: (a) Project Management (b) Chemical Process Engineering; (c) Chemistry; (d) Hydrogeology ; (e) Risk Assessment; (f) Environmental Engineering (g) Civil Engineering; (h) Geotechnical Engineering; (i) Industrial Hygiene; (j) Health Physics; (k) Cost Engineering; (l) Geology; (m) Archaeology; (n) Biology; (o) Mechanical Engineering; (p) Electrical Engineering; (q) Architecture/Landscape Planning; and (r) Structural Engineering; (3 ) Past performance on DoD and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work, management/business relations, and compliance with performance schedules. Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS) is the primary source of information on past performance. ACASS will be queried for all firms submitting a proposal using the DUNS numbers provided in Parts I and II of the submitted SF 330. If deemed appropriate by the evaluation board, performance evaluations for any significant team subcontractors who have previously been prime A-E contractors may also be considered. The board may seek information on past performance from other sources, but is not required to seek other information on the past performance of a firm, if none is available from ACASS. The board will consider the relevancy of each performance evaluation to the proposed contract, including the type of work, performing office, age of the evaluation, and whether subsequent evaluations indicate a change in a firm's performance. A firm that has earned excellent evaluations on recent DoD A-E contracts for similar size, scope, and complexity of projects will be ranked relatively high on past performance; (4) Capacity. The board will consider available capacity of key disciplines identified above from the prime firm and its team consultants to perform work in the required time; (5) Knowledge of the locality. The board will evaluate a firm's familiarity with local conditions. Examples include knowledge of, and experience dealing with, the state and local regulatory agencies, geological features, climatic conditions or local construction methods that are unusual or unique. Work under these contracts may be in a widely dispersed geographic area; therefore, responding firms should demonstrate the extent of their capabilities to serve projects located throughout the USACE NWD. (B) Secondary Selection Criteria. The following secondary criteria will only be used as a tie-breaker, if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be co-mingled with the primary criteria in the evaluation. The secondary criterion is Volume of DoD A-E Contract Awards in the last twelve (12) months. Responding firms should cite all contract numbers, award dates and total contract amounts for any DoD A-E contract awarded within the past twelve (12) months. Please indicate all task orders and modifications awarded your firm by DoD agencies within the last twelve (12) months under an indefinite delivery type contract. Indicate date of task orders and contract amounts for each. This information will assist in effecting an equitable distribution of DoD A-E contracts among qualified firms. 4. Submittal Requirements: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit one (1) original plus five (5) copies of SF 330 (06/2004 edition) for the prime firm and all team consultants. Include the firm's DUNS number in SF 330, Part I, Section B, Block 4. A minimum of five (5), but not more than ten (10) projects should be submitted in Section F of the SF 330. A "project" is defined as work performed pursuant to one specific task order of an IDC at one site or multiple sites at a single installation or facility, or work performed pursuant to a site-specific contract for one site or multiple sites within a single installation or facility. An IDC, or the performance of work pursuant to multiple task orders of an IDC, does not represent a "project" within this definition. If the offeror provides a specific task order as its "project," it shall provide the base contract number and the task order number for reference purposes. If the offeror provides a site-specific contract as its "project," it shall provide the contract number for reference purposes. Firms may include as a "project" relevant HTRW work at a single site which was accomplished under multiple contracts and multiple task orders. The work accomplished at a single site may include a description of multiple Operable Units or multiple phases of work at that site. Firms should include information regarding the Secondary Selection Criteria in Section H of the SF 330. Section H is limited to twenty (20) pages with double-sided sheets counting as two pages. Page sheets of 11 inches X 17 inches will be counted as two pages. For all SF 330 sections, use no smaller than 10 pt. font. No spiral bound documents shall be submitted. Solicitation packages are not provided. This is not a request for proposal. Submittals must be mailed or delivered to the following address not later than October 4, 2011, 4:00 pm Central Time (no faxed or other electronic submittals will be accepted): U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District Attn: CECT-NWK-H (Michael Dolly) 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-2896 (816) 389-3430 Submit questions, in writing only, to Michael Dolly at Michael.S.Dolly@usace.army.mil Contracting Office Address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District 601 East 12th Street (Room 647) Kansas City, MO 64106-2896 Place of Performance: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division (NWD)

C--HUBZone Small Business Set-Aside Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services within the Northwestern Division (MEGA Phase A)

Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Published August 1, 2011  -  Deadline October 4, 2011
cpvs

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for A-E Services. FAR Subpart 12.6 DOES NOT apply. 1. Contract Information: The Northwestern Division (NWD) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a requirement to acquire Architect-Engineer (A-E) Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW)/Environmental Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for execution of its environmental mission. This contract acquisition is part of NWD's Phase A of the Multiple Environmental Government Acquisition (MEGA). These regional A-E contract acquisitions will be conducted in accordance with Public Law 92-582, the Brooks Act, and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6 and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 236.6. The majority of the work will be located within the NWD (including Kansas City, Omaha, and Seattle Districts). In support of this effort, the Government intends to award contracts to two (2) HUBZone Small Business firms sharing $10 million in total contract capacity. However, if the Contracting Officer determines during the selection process that fewer or more than two (2) contracts should be awarded, based upon the selection criteria, the Contracting Officer has the discretion of adjusting that number, or awarding none at all. The period of performance for each contract will include a base period of three (3) years and one option period of two (2) years. It is anticipated that the contracts will be awarded not earlier than December 2011. Task orders will be issued as the need arises during the contract period. Task order assignments will be determined with consideration of each firm's experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity. These task orders will be firm fixed-price. The period of performance on individual task orders shall not exceed five (5) years. Firms receiving award will share an ordering amount of $10 million over the life of the contracts. The NAICS Code for this procurement is 541330 -- Engineering Services. For the purposes of this procurement a concern is considered a small business if its average annual gross receipts are $4.5 million or less. More than one contract will be awarded for the same scope of work. Under the Brooks Act, price competition is not allowed for A-E contracts. When a requirement is identified, the government will first determine if it is a new requirement or a follow-on effort to an existing HTRW/environmental project. Due to the nature of the requirements, projects are completed in phases such as preliminary assessment, remedial investigation, feasibility study, and then design. Experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity will be considered to determine which firm is best qualified to accomplish the work for either a new or follow-on requirement. The period of performance for the IDC will begin on the date of contract award and will be in effect for the three (3) year base period; in addition there is a provision for one two (2) year option period; if the option period is exercised, the length of the contract will be five (5) years. The period of performance for task orders awarded under the IDCs will be determined based upon the work requirement (not to exceed five (5) years) and will be included in the task order solicitation and negotiated award documents. The Service Contract Act of 1965, as Amended, is applicable to this solicitation and resulting contracts and will be incorporated into same. Service wage rates will be determined relative to the employee's office location rather than the location of work. To be eligible for contract award, a firm must have a DUNS number from Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) and be registered in the Department of Defense (DoD) Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet site at http://www.ccr.gov or by calling 1-866-606-8220. D&B can be reached by calling 1-866-705-5711. Firms are also required to use the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). ORCA is a web-based system that centralizes and standardizes the collection, storage, and viewing of many of the representations and certifications required by the FAR and previously found in solicitations. Detailed information can be found in the Help section of the ORCA website at http://orca.bpn.gov. The help section includes ORCA background information, frequently asked questions (FAQ), the ORCA Handbook, and whom to call for assistance. Additionally, in accordance with FAR Part 22.1303, all firms must complete their VETS-100 report. Information can be found at the Department of Labor website http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm, or call the service center at 1-866-237-0275; you will be asked to provide your company name, employer identification number (EIN), and DUNS number. 2. Project Information: Firms must be capable of performing work on a wide variety of HTRW/environmental sites in a manner that complies with federal, state, and local regulations and laws, and within time frames required. A majority of the work to be performed is expected to be for HTRW/environmental projects in NWD. Specific needs will be determined based upon project requirements as described in each task order. Project assignments will typically require performance on-site and in an office setting. Assignments will include, but not be limited to: site investigations, subsurface exploration, chemical sampling, testing and analyses, hazard evaluations, feasibility and other engineering studies and reports, archaeological investigations and mitigation, wetlands determination and mitigation studies, groundwater and other modeling, contaminant fate and transport analysis, HTRW remedial designs, preparation of plans and specifications, cost estimating, value engineering screenings and studies, field inspections, verification of existing conditions, pilot studies, surveying and mapping, community relations, construction-phase services (engineering design during construction, checking shop drawings), evaluations of green technologies and energy conservation measures, and other related services. Selected firms will work on a variety of hazardous waste and other environmental projects, including, but not limited to: contaminated soil and groundwater, contaminated sediments, radioactive and mixed wastes, underground storage tanks and fueling systems and habitat restoration and mitigation. For on-site investigations, firms must provide personnel with current health and safety training, as required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 3. Selection Criteria: (A) Selection of the firms will be based on the following primary criteria, listed in descending order of importance: (1) Specialized experience and technical competence of the firm's team demonstrated during the past five (5) years in the broad range of environmental work required for this contract including (a) Investigation, planning, design, and construction phase services for a variety of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste cleanup projects. Experience must demonstrate wide-ranging capabilities for diverse projects with differing contaminants in various media. (b) Knowledge of and adherence to regulations and practices pertaining to hazardous waste sampling, handling, transportation and disposal including Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), and (National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). (c) Oversight of Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, Remedial Action, and Long Term Response Action projects performed by other parties, in conformance to their respective consent decrees or administrative orders negotiated with EPA; (d) Demonstrated quality management procedures. The effectiveness of the proposed project team (including management structure, coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) will be considered within quality management. Firms will be evaluated for the degree in which their team possesses experience and competence in these areas (a through d, above). The most highly qualified firms will have extensive experience in all of these areas; (2) Professional qualifications of a firm's staff and team consultants to be assigned to this contract. The education, training, registration, proposed job title, overall and relevant experience, longevity with the firm, and experience of personnel working together with key management and other technical personnel will be considered. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion below. Responding firms should demonstrate the professional qualifications of their staff in these primary disciplines, which are listed in descending order of importance. List professional registrations, if applicable, for the key disciplines: (a) Project Management (b) Chemical Process Engineering; (c) Chemistry; (d) Hydrogeology ; (e) Risk Assessment; (f) Environmental Engineering (g) Civil Engineering; (h) Geotechnical Engineering; (i) Industrial Hygiene; (j) Health Physics; (k) Cost Engineering; (l) Geology; (m) Archaeology; (n) Biology; (o) Mechanical Engineering; (p) Electrical Engineering; (q) Architecture/Landscape Planning; and (r) Structural Engineering; (3 ) Past performance on DoD and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work, management/business relations, and compliance with performance schedules. Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS) is the primary source of information on past performance. ACASS will be queried for all firms submitting a proposal using the DUNS numbers provided in Parts I and II of the submitted SF 330. If deemed appropriate by the evaluation board, performance evaluations for any significant team subcontractors who have previously been prime A-E contractors may also be considered. The board may seek information on past performance from other sources, but is not required to seek other information on the past performance of a firm, if none is available from ACASS. The board will consider the relevancy of each performance evaluation to the proposed contract, including the type of work, performing office, age of the evaluation, and whether subsequent evaluations indicate a change in a firm's performance. A firm that has earned excellent evaluations on recent DoD A-E contracts for similar size, scope, and complexity of projects will be ranked relatively high on past performance; (4) Capacity. The board will consider available capacity of key disciplines identified above from the prime firm and its team consultants to perform work in the required time; (5) Knowledge of the locality. The board will evaluate a firm's familiarity with local conditions. Examples include knowledge of, and experience dealing with, the state and local regulatory agencies, geological features, climatic conditions or local construction methods that are unusual or unique. Work under these contracts may be in a widely dispersed geographic area; therefore, responding firms should demonstrate the extent of their capabilities to serve projects located throughout NWD. (B) Secondary Selection Criteria. The following secondary criteria will only be used as a tie-breaker, if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be co-mingled with the primary criteria in the evaluation. The secondary criterion is Volume of DoD A-E Contract Awards in the last twelve (12) months. Responding firms should cite all contract numbers, award dates and total contract amounts for any DoD A-E contract awarded within the past twelve (12) months. Please indicate all task orders and modifications awarded your firm by DoD agencies within the last twelve (12) months under an indefinite delivery type contract. Indicate date of task orders and contract amounts for each. This information will assist in effecting an equitable distribution of DoD A-E contracts among qualified firms. 4. Submittal Requirements: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit one (1) original plus five (5) copies of SF 330 (06/2004 edition) for the prime firm and all team consultants. Include the firm's DUNS number in SF 330, Part I, Section B, Block 4. A minimum of five (5), but not more than ten (10) projects should be submitted in Section F of the SF 330. A "project" is defined as work performed pursuant to one specific task order of an IDC at one site or multiple sites at a single installation or facility, or work performed pursuant to a site-specific contract for one site or multiple sites within a single installation or facility. An IDC, or the performance of work pursuant to multiple task orders of an IDC, does not represent a "project" within this definition. If the offeror provides a specific task order as its "project," it shall provide the base contract number and the task order number for reference purposes. If the offeror provides a site-specific contract as its "project," it shall provide the contract number for reference purposes. Firms may include as a "project" relevant HTRW work at a single site which was accomplished under multiple contracts and multiple task orders. The work accomplished at a single site may include a description of multiple Operable Units or multiple phases of work at that site. Firms should include information regarding the Secondary Selection Criteria in Section H of the SF 330. Section H is limited to twenty (20) pages with double-sided sheets counting as two pages. Page sheets of 11 inches X 17 inches will be counted as two pages. For all SF 330 sections, use no smaller than 10 pt. font. No spiral bound documents shall be submitted. Solicitation packages are not provided. This is not a request for proposal. Submittals must be mailed or delivered to the following address not later than October 4, 2011, 4:00 pm Central Time (no faxed or other electronic submittals will be accepted): U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District Attn: CECT-NWK-H (Michael Dolly) 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-2896 (816) 389-3430 Submit questions, in writing only, to Michael Dolly at Michael.S.Dolly@usace.army.mil Contracting Office Address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District 601 East 12th Street (Room 647) Kansas City, MO 64106-2896 Place of Performance: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division (NWD)

C--Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Set-Aside Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services within the Northwestern Division (MEGA Phase A)

Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Published August 1, 2011  -  Deadline October 4, 2011
cpvs

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. **This is an Architect-Engineer Service synopsis. FAR Subpart 12.6 does not apply.** 1. Contract Information: The Northwestern Division (NWD) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a requirement to acquire Architect-Engineer (A-E) Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW)/Environmental Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for execution of its environmental mission. This contract acquisition is part of NWD's Phase A of the Multiple Environmental Government Acquisition (MEGA). These regional A-E contract acquisitions will be conducted in accordance with Public Law 92-582, the Brooks Act, and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6 and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 236.6. The majority of the work will be located within the NWD (including Kansas City, Omaha, and Seattle Districts). In support of this effort, the Government intends to award contracts to two (2) Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) firms sharing $10 million in total contract capacity. However, if the Contracting Officer determines during the selection process that fewer or more than two (2) contracts should be awarded, based upon the selection criteria, the Contracting Officer has the discretion of adjusting that number, or awarding none at all. The period of performance for each contract will include a base period of three (3) years and one option period of two (2) years. It is anticipated that the contracts will be awarded not earlier than December 2011. Task orders will be issued as the need arises during the contract period. Task order assignments will be determined with consideration of each firm's experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity. These task orders will be firm fixed-price. The period of performance on individual task orders shall not exceed five (5) years. Firms receiving award will share an ordering amount of $10 million over the life of the contracts. The NAICS Code for this procurement is 541330 -- Engineering Services. For the purposes of this procurement a concern is considered a small business if its average annual gross receipts are $4.5 million or less. More than one contract will be awarded for the same scope of work. Under the Brooks Act, price competition is not allowed for A-E contracts. When a requirement is identified, the government will first determine if it is a new requirement or a follow-on effort to an existing HTRW/environmental project. Due to the nature of the requirements, projects are completed in phases such as preliminary assessment, remedial investigation, feasibility study, and then design. Experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity will be considered to determine which firm is best qualified to accomplish the work for either a new or follow-on requirement. The period of performance for the IDC will begin on the date of contract award and will be in effect for the three (3) year base period; in addition there is a provision for one two (2) year option period; if the option period is exercised, the length of the contract will be five (5) years. The period of performance for task orders awarded under the IDCs will be determined based upon the work requirement (not to exceed five (5) years) and will be included in the task order solicitation and negotiated award documents. The Service Contract Act of 1965, as Amended, is applicable to this solicitation and resulting contracts and will be incorporated into same. Service wage rates will be determined relative to the employee's office location rather than the location of work. To be eligible for contract award, a firm must have a DUNS number from Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) and be registered in the Department of Defense (DoD) Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet site at http://www.ccr.gov or by calling 1-866-606-8220. D&B can be reached by calling 1-866-705-5711. Firms are also required to use the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). ORCA is a web-based system that centralizes and standardizes the collection, storage, and viewing of many of the representations and certifications required by the FAR and previously found in solicitations. Detailed information can be found in the Help section of the ORCA website at http://orca.bpn.gov. The help section includes ORCA background information, frequently asked questions (FAQ), the ORCA Handbook, and whom to call for assistance. Additionally, in accordance with FAR Part 22.1303, all firms must complete their VETS-100 report. Information can be found at the Department of Labor website http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm, or call the service center at 1-866-237-0275; you will be asked to provide your company name, employer identification number (EIN), and DUNS number. 2. Project Information: Firms must be capable of performing work on a wide variety of HTRW/environmental sites in a manner that complies with federal, state, and local regulations and laws, and within time frames required. A majority of the work to be performed is expected to be for HTRW/environmental projects in NWD. Specific needs will be determined based upon project requirements as described in each task order. Project assignments will typically require performance on-site and in an office setting. Assignments will include, but not be limited to: site investigations, subsurface exploration, chemical sampling, testing and analyses, hazard evaluations, feasibility and other engineering studies and reports, archaeological investigations and mitigation, wetlands determination and mitigation studies, groundwater and other modeling, contaminant fate and transport analysis, HTRW remedial designs, preparation of plans and specifications, cost estimating, value engineering screenings and studies, field inspections, verification of existing conditions, pilot studies, surveying and mapping, community relations, construction-phase services (engineering design during construction, checking shop drawings), evaluations of green technologies and energy conservation measures, and other related services. Selected firms will work on a variety of hazardous waste and other environmental projects, including, but not limited to: contaminated soil and groundwater, contaminated sediments, radioactive and mixed wastes, underground storage tanks and fueling systems and habitat restoration and mitigation. For on-site investigations, firms must provide personnel with current health and safety training, as required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 3. Selection Criteria: (A) Selection of the firms will be based on the following primary criteria, listed in descending order of importance: (1) Specialized experience and technical competence of the firm's team demonstrated during the past five (5) years in the broad range of environmental work required for this contract including (a) Investigation, planning, design, and construction phase services for a variety of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste cleanup projects. Experience must demonstrate wide-ranging capabilities for diverse projects with differing contaminants in various media. (b) Knowledge of and adherence to regulations and practices pertaining to hazardous waste sampling, handling, transportation and disposal including Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), and (National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). (c) Oversight of Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, Remedial Action, and Long Term Response Action projects performed by other parties, in conformance to their respective consent decrees or administrative orders negotiated with EPA; (d) Demonstrated quality management procedures. The effectiveness of the proposed project team (including management structure, coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) will be considered within quality management. Firms will be evaluated for the degree in which their team possesses experience and competence in these areas (a through d, above). The most highly qualified firms will have extensive experience in all of these areas; (2) Professional qualifications of a firm's staff and team consultants to be assigned to this contract. The education, training, registration, proposed job title, overall and relevant experience, longevity with the firm, and experience of personnel working together with key management and other technical personnel will be considered. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion below. Responding firms should demonstrate the professional qualifications of their staff in these primary disciplines, which are listed in descending order of importance. List professional registrations, if applicable, for the key disciplines: (a) Project Management (b) Chemical Process Engineering; (c) Chemistry; (d) Hydrogeology ; (e) Risk Assessment; (f) Environmental Engineering (g) Civil Engineering; (h) Geotechnical Engineering; (i) Industrial Hygiene; (j) Health Physics; (k) Cost Engineering; (l) Geology; (m) Archaeology; (n) Biology; (o) Mechanical Engineering; (p) Electrical Engineering; (q) Architecture/Landscape Planning; and (r) Structural Engineering; (3 ) Past performance on DoD and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work, management/business relations, and compliance with performance schedules. Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS) is the primary source of information on past performance. ACASS will be queried for all firms submitting a proposal using the DUNS numbers provided in Parts I and II of the submitted SF 330. If deemed appropriate by the evaluation board, performance evaluations for any significant team subcontractors who have previously been prime A-E contractors may also be considered. The board may seek information on past performance from other sources, but is not required to seek other information on the past performance of a firm, if none is available from ACASS. The board will consider the relevancy of each performance evaluation to the proposed contract, including the type of work, performing office, age of the evaluation, and whether subsequent evaluations indicate a change in a firm's performance. A firm that has earned excellent evaluations on recent DoD A-E contracts for similar size, scope, and complexity of projects will be ranked relatively high on past performance; (4) Capacity. The board will consider available capacity of key disciplines identified above from the prime firm and its team consultants to perform work in the required time; (5) Knowledge of the locality. The board will evaluate a firm's familiarity with local conditions. Examples include knowledge of, and experience dealing with, the state and local regulatory agencies, geological features, climatic conditions or local construction methods that are unusual or unique. Work under these contracts may be in a widely dispersed geographic area; therefore, responding firms should demonstrate the extent of their capabilities to serve projects located throughout NWD. (B) Secondary Selection Criteria. The following secondary criteria will only be used as a tie-breaker, if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be co-mingled with the primary criteria in the evaluation. The secondary criterion is Volume of DoD A-E Contract Awards in the last twelve (12) months. Responding firms should cite all contract numbers, award dates and total contract amounts for any DoD A-E contract awarded within the past twelve (12) months. Please indicate all task orders and modifications awarded your firm by DoD agencies within the last twelve (12) months under an indefinite delivery type contract. Indicate date of task orders and contract amounts for each. This information will assist in effecting an equitable distribution of DoD A-E contracts among qualified firms. 4. Submittal Requirements: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit one (1) original plus five (5) copies of SF 330 (06/2004 edition) for the prime firm and all team consultants. Include the firm's DUNS number in SF 330, Part I, Section B, Block 4. A minimum of five (5), but not more than ten (10) projects should be submitted in Section F of the SF 330. A "project" is defined as work performed pursuant to one specific task order of an IDC at one site or multiple sites at a single installation or facility, or work performed pursuant to a site-specific contract for one site or multiple sites within a single installation or facility. An IDC, or the performance of work pursuant to multiple task orders of an IDC, does not represent a "project" within this definition. If the offeror provides a specific task order as its "project," it shall provide the base contract number and the task order number for reference purposes. If the offeror provides a site-specific contract as its "project," it shall provide the contract number for reference purposes. Firms may include as a "project" relevant HTRW work at a single site which was accomplished under multiple contracts and multiple task orders. The work accomplished at a single site may include a description of multiple Operable Units or multiple phases of work at that site. Firms should include information regarding the Secondary Selection Criteria in Section H of the SF 330. Section H is limited to twenty (20) pages with double-sided sheets counting as two pages. Page sheets of 11 inches X 17 inches will be counted as two pages. For all SF 330 sections, use no smaller than 10 pt. font. No spiral bound documents shall be submitted. Solicitation packages are not provided. This is not a request for proposal. Submittals must be mailed or delivered to the following address not later than October 4, 2011, 4:00 pm Central Time (no faxed or other electronic submittals will be accepted): U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District Attn: CECT-NWK-H (William Hill) 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-2896 (816) 389-3827 Submit questions, in writing only, to William Hill at William.J.Hill@usace.army.mil Contracting Office Address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District 601 East 12th Street (Room 647) Kansas City, MO 64106-2896

C--8(a) Small Business Set-Aside Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services within the Northwestern Division (MEGA Phase A).

Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Published August 1, 2011  -  Deadline October 4, 2011
cpvs

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. **This is an Architect-Engineer Service synopsis. FAR Subpart 12.6 does not apply.** 1. Contract Information: The Northwestern Division (NWD) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a requirement to acquire Architect-Engineer (A-E) Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW)/Environmental Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for execution of its environmental mission. This contract acquisition is part of NWD's Phase A of the Multiple Environmental Government Acquisition (MEGA). These regional A-E contract acquisitions will be conducted in accordance with Public Law 92-582, the Brooks Act, and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6 and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 236.6. The majority of the work will be located within the NWD (including Kansas City, Omaha, and Seattle Districts). In support of this effort, the Government intends to award contracts to two (2) 8(a) Small Business firms sharing $10 million in total contract capacity. However, if the Contracting Officer determines during the selection process that fewer or more than two (2) contracts should be awarded, based upon the selection criteria, the Contracting Officer has the discretion of adjusting that number, or awarding none at all. The period of performance for each contract will include a base period of three (3) years and one option period of two (2) years. It is anticipated that the contracts will be awarded not earlier than December 2011. Task orders will be issued as the need arises during the contract period. Task order assignments will be determined with consideration of each firm's experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity. These task orders may be either firm fixed-price or cost reimbursable type orders. The period of performance on individual task orders shall not exceed five (5) years. Firms receiving award will share an ordering amount of $10 million over the life of the contracts. The NAICS Code for this procurement is 541330 -- Engineering Services. For the purposes of this procurement a concern is considered a small business if its average annual gross receipts are $4.5 million or less. More than one contract will be awarded for the same scope of work. Under the Brooks Act, price competition is not allowed for A-E contracts. When a requirement is identified, the government will first determine if it is a new requirement or a follow-on effort to an existing HTRW/environmental project. Due to the nature of the requirements, projects are completed in phases such as preliminary assessment, remedial investigation, feasibility study, and then design. If a follow-on requirement, determination of the selected A-E will be conducted considering a firm's experience, qualifications, capability, and capacity to perform the work. For new requirements, the project scope will be reviewed to determine whether the requirement can be accomplished using a firm fixed-price task order or whether uncertainties will require the use of a cost reimbursable task order. Experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity will be considered to determine which firm is best qualified to accomplish the work. The period of performance for the IDC will begin on the date of contract award and will be in effect for the three (3) year base period; in addition there is a provision for one two (2) year option period; if the option period is exercised, the length of the contract will be five (5) years. The period of performance for task orders awarded under the IDCs will be determined based upon the work requirement (not to exceed five (5) years) and will be included in the task order solicitation and negotiated award documents. The Service Contract Act of 1965, as Amended, is applicable to this solicitation and resulting contracts and will be incorporated into same. Service wage rates will be determined relative to the employee's office location rather than the location of work. To be eligible for contract award, a firm must have a DUNS number from Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) and be registered in the Department of Defense (DoD) Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet site at http://www.ccr.gov or by calling 1-866-606-8220. D&B can be reached by calling 1-866-705-5711. Firms are also required to use the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). ORCA is a web-based system that centralizes and standardizes the collection, storage, and viewing of many of the representations and certifications required by the FAR and previously found in solicitations. Detailed information can be found in the Help section of the ORCA website at http://orca.bpn.gov. The help section includes ORCA background information, frequently asked questions (FAQ), the ORCA Handbook, and whom to call for assistance. Additionally, in accordance with FAR Part 22.1303, all firms must complete their VETS-100 report. Information can be found at the Department of Labor website http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm, or call the service center at 1-866-237-0275; you will be asked to provide your company name, employer identification number (EIN), and DUNS number. 2. Project Information: Firms must be capable of performing work on a wide variety of HTRW/environmental sites in a manner that complies with federal, state, and local regulations and laws, and within time frames required. A majority of the work to be performed is expected to be for HTRW/environmental projects in NWD. Specific needs will be determined based upon project requirements as described in each task order. Project assignments will typically require performance on-site and in an office setting. Assignments will include, but not be limited to: site investigations, subsurface exploration, chemical sampling, testing and analyses, hazard evaluations, feasibility and other engineering studies and reports, archaeological investigations and mitigation, wetlands determination and mitigation studies, groundwater and other modeling, contaminant fate and transport analysis, HTRW remedial designs, preparation of plans and specifications, cost estimating, value engineering screenings and studies, field inspections, verification of existing conditions, pilot studies, surveying and mapping, community relations, construction-phase services (engineering design during construction, checking shop drawings), evaluations of green technologies and energy conservation measures, and other related services. Selected firms will work on a variety of hazardous waste and other environmental projects, including, but not limited to: contaminated soil and groundwater, contaminated sediments, radioactive and mixed wastes, underground storage tanks and fueling systems and habitat restoration and mitigation. For on-site investigations, firms must provide personnel with current health and safety training, as required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 3. Selection Criteria: (A) Selection of the firms will be based on the following primary criteria, listed in descending order of importance: (1) Specialized experience and technical competence of the firm's team demonstrated during the past five (5) years in the broad range of environmental work required for this contract including (a) Investigation, planning, design, and construction phase services for a variety of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste cleanup projects. Experience must demonstrate wide-ranging capabilities for diverse projects with differing contaminants in various media. (b) Knowledge of and adherence to regulations and practices pertaining to hazardous waste sampling, handling, transportation and disposal including Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), and (National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). (c) Oversight of Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, Remedial Action, and Long Term Response Action projects performed by other parties, in conformance to their respective consent decrees or administrative orders negotiated with EPA; (d) Demonstrated quality management procedures. The effectiveness of the proposed project team (including management structure, coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) will be considered within quality management; (e) Capability in managing cost-reimbursable contracts/task orders. The prime A-E firm will demonstrate adequate experience with a cost accounting system for cost-reimbursable contracts/task orders. Firms will be evaluated for the degree in which their team possesses experience and competence in these areas (a through e, above). The most highly qualified firms will have extensive experience in all of these areas; (2) Professional qualifications of a firm's staff and team consultants to be assigned to this contract. The education, training, registration, proposed job title, overall and relevant experience, longevity with the firm, and experience of personnel working together with key management and other technical personnel will be considered. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion below. Responding firms should demonstrate the professional qualifications of their staff in these primary disciplines, which are listed in descending order of importance. List professional registrations, if applicable, for the key disciplines: (a) Project Management (b) Chemical Process Engineering; (c) Chemistry; (d) Hydrogeology ; (e) Risk Assessment; (f) Environmental Engineering (g) Civil Engineering; (h) Geotechnical Engineering; (i) Industrial Hygiene; (j) Health Physics; (k) Cost Engineering; (l) Geology; (m) Archaeology; (n) Biology; (o) Mechanical Engineering; (p) Electrical Engineering; (q) Architecture/Landscape Planning; and (r) Structural Engineering; (3 ) Past performance on DoD and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work, management/business relations, and compliance with performance schedules. Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS) is the primary source of information on past performance. ACASS will be queried for all firms submitting a proposal using the DUNS numbers provided in Parts I and II of the submitted SF 330. If deemed appropriate by the evaluation board, performance evaluations for any significant team subcontractors who have previously been prime A-E contractors may also be considered. The board may seek information on past performance from other sources, but is not required to seek other information on the past performance of a firm, if none is available from ACASS. The board will consider the relevancy of each performance evaluation to the proposed contract, including the type of work, performing office, age of the evaluation, and whether subsequent evaluations indicate a change in a firm's performance. A firm that has earned excellent evaluations on recent DoD A-E contracts for similar size, scope, and complexity of projects will be ranked relatively high on past performance; (4) Capacity. The board will consider available capacity of key disciplines identified above from the prime firm and its team consultants to perform work in the required time; (5) Knowledge of the locality. The board will evaluate a firm's familiarity with local conditions. Examples include knowledge of, and experience dealing with, the state and local regulatory agencies, geological features, climatic conditions or local construction methods that are unusual or unique. Work under these contracts may be in a widely dispersed geographic area; therefore, responding firms should demonstrate the extent of their capabilities to serve projects located throughout the USACE NWD. (B) Secondary Selection Criteria. The following secondary criteria will only be used as a tie-breaker, if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be co-mingled with the primary criteria in the evaluation. The secondary criterion is Volume of DoD A-E Contract Awards in the last twelve (12) months. Responding firms should cite all contract numbers, award dates and total contract amounts for any DoD A-E contract awarded within the past twelve (12) months. Please indicate all task orders and modifications awarded your firm by DoD agencies within the last twelve (12) months under an indefinite delivery type contract. Indicate date of task orders and contract amounts for each. This information will assist in effecting an equitable distribution of DoD A-E contracts among qualified firms. 4. Submittal Requirements: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit one (1) original plus five (5) copies of SF 330 (06/2004 edition) for the prime firm and all team consultants. Include the firm's DUNS number in SF 330, Part I, Section B, Block 4. A minimum of five (5), but not more than ten (10) projects should be submitted in Section F of the SF 330. A "project" is defined as work performed pursuant to one specific task order of an IDC at one site or multiple sites at a single installation or facility, or work performed pursuant to a site-specific contract for one site or multiple sites within a single installation or facility. An IDC, or the performance of work pursuant to multiple task orders of an IDC, does not represent a "project" within this definition. If the offeror provides a specific task order as its "project," it shall provide the base contract number and the task order number for reference purposes. If the offeror provides a site-specific contract as its "project," it shall provide the contract number for reference purposes. Firms may include as a "project" relevant HTRW work at a single site which was accomplished under multiple contracts and multiple task orders. The work accomplished at a single site may include a description of multiple Operable Units or multiple phases of work at that site. Firms should include information regarding the Secondary Selection Criteria in Section H of the SF 330. Section H is limited to twenty (20) pages with double-sided sheets counting as two pages. Page sheets of 11 inches X 17 inches will be counted as two pages. For all SF 330 sections, use no smaller than 10 pt. font. No spiral bound documents shall be submitted. Solicitation packages are not provided. This is not a request for proposal. Submittals must be mailed or delivered to the following address not later than October 4, 2011, 4:00 pm Central Time (no faxed or other electronic submittals will be accepted): U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District Attn: CECT-NWK-H (William Hill) 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-2896 (816) 389-3827 Submit questions, in writing only, to William Hill at William.J.Hill@usace.army.mil Contracting Office Address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District 601 East 12th Street (Room 647) Kansas City, MO 64106-2896

C--Unrestricted Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for Architect-Engineering (A-E) Services within EPA Region 2 and the Northwestern Division (MEGA Phase A)

Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Published May 16, 2011  -  Deadline July 1, 2011
cpvs

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. 1. Contract Information: The Northwestern Division (NWD) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a requirement to acquire Architect-Engineer (A-E) Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW)/Environmental Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for execution of its environmental mission. This contract acquisition is part of NWD's Phase A of the Multiple Environmental Government Acquisition (MEGA). These regional A-E contract acquisitions will be conducted in accordance with Public Law 92-582, the Brooks Act, and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6 and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 236.6. The majority of the work will be located within Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 2 (which includes New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands) and the NWD (including Kansas City, Omaha, and Seattle Districts). In support of this effort, the Government intends to award contracts to five (5) unrestricted firms sharing $150 million in total contract capacity. However, if the Contracting Officer determines during the selection process that fewer or more than five (5) contracts should be awarded, based upon the selection criteria, the Contracting Officer has the discretion of adjusting that number, or awarding none at all. This announcement is unrestricted and open to all businesses, regardless of size. The period of performance for each contract will include a base period of three (3) years and one option period of two (2) years. It is anticipated that the contracts will be awarded not earlier than August 2011. Task orders will be issued as the need arises during the contract period. Task order assignments will be determined with consideration of each firm's experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity. These task orders may be either firm fixed-price or cost reimbursable type orders. There is no limit on the value of individual task orders and the period of performance on individual task orders shall not exceed five (5) years. Firms receiving award will share an ordering amount of $150 million over the life of the contracts. Large businesses selected will be required to submit a subcontracting plan. The USACE subcontracting goals, which will be considered in the negotiation of the contracts, are: a minimum of 50% of a contractor's intended subcontract amount be placed with Small Businesses (SB) with 17% of that to Small Disadvantage Businesses (SDB), 18% to Women-owned Small Business (WOSB), 10% to Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZones), 8.5% to Veteran-owned, and 4% to Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned SB (SDVOSB). The NAICS Code for this procurement is 541330 -- Engineering Services. For the purposes of this procurement a concern is considered a small business if its average annual gross receipts are $4.5 million or less. More than one contract will be awarded for the same scope of work. Under the Brooks Act, price competition is not allowed for A-E contracts. When a requirement is identified, the government will first determine if it is a new requirement or a follow-on effort to an existing HTRW/environmental project. Due to the nature of the requirements, projects are completed in phases such as preliminary assessment, remedial investigation, feasibility study, and then design. If a follow-on requirement, determination of the selected A-E will be conducted considering a firm's experience, qualifications, capability, and capacity to perform the work. For new requirements, the project scope will be reviewed to determine whether the requirement can be accomplished using a firm fixed-price task order or whether uncertainties will require the use of a cost reimbursable task order. An evaluation will also be conducted to determine if a small business is capable of performing the work. Experience, qualifications, past performance, capability, and capacity will be considered to determine which firm is best qualified to accomplish the work. The period of performance for the IDC will begin on the date of contract award and will be in effect for the three (3) year base period; in addition there is a provision for one two (2) year option period; if the option period is exercised, the length of the contract will be five (5) years. The period of performance for task orders awarded under the IDCs will be determined based upon the work requirement (not to exceed five (5) years) and will be included in the task order solicitation and negotiated award documents. The Service Contract Act of 1965, as Amended, is applicable to this solicitation and resulting contracts and will be incorporated into same. Service wage rates will be determined relative to the employee's office location rather than the location of work. To be eligible for contract award, a firm must have a D-U-N-S number from Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) and be registered in the Department of Defense (DoD) Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet site at http://www.ccr.gov or by calling 1-866-606-8220. D&B can be reached by calling 1-866-705-5711. Firms are also required to use the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). ORCA is a web-based system that centralizes and standardizes the collection, storage, and viewing of many of the representations and certifications required by the FAR and previously found in solicitations. Detailed information can be found in the Help section of the ORCA website at http://orca.bpn.gov. The help section includes ORCA background information, frequently asked questions (FAQ), the ORCA Handbook, and whom to call for assistance. Additionally, in accordance with FAR Part 22.1303, all firms must complete their VETS-100 report. Information can be found at the Department of Labor website http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/fcp/main.htm, or call the service center at 1-866-237-0275; you will be asked to provide your company name, employer identification number (EIN), and DUNs number. 2. Project Information: Firms must be capable of performing work on a wide variety of HTRW/environmental sites in a manner that complies with federal, state, and local regulations and laws, and within time frames required. A majority of the work to be performed is expected to be for Superfund projects in EPA Region 2. Specific needs will be determined based upon project requirements as described in each task order. Project assignments will typically require performance on-site and in an office setting. Assignments will include, but not be limited to: site investigations, subsurface exploration, chemical sampling, testing and analyses, hazard evaluations, feasibility and other engineering studies and reports, archaeological investigations and mitigation, wetlands determination and mitigation studies, groundwater and other modeling, contaminant fate and transport analysis, HTRW remedial designs, preparation of plans and specifications, cost estimating, value engineering screenings and studies, field inspections, verification of existing conditions, pilot studies, surveying and mapping, community relations, construction-phase services (engineering design during construction, checking shop drawings), evaluations of green technologies and energy conservation measures, and other related services. Selected firms will work on a variety of hazardous waste and other environmental projects, including, but not limited to: contaminated soil and groundwater, contaminated sediments, radioactive and mixed wastes, underground storage tanks and fueling systems and habitat restoration and mitigation. For on-site investigations, firms must provide personnel with current health and safety training, as required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 3. Selection Criteria: (A) Selection of the firms will be based on the following primary criteria, listed in descending order of importance: (1) Specialized experience and technical competence of the firm's team demonstrated during the past five (5) years in the broad range of environmental work required for this contract including (a) Investigation, planning, design, and construction phase services for a variety of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste cleanup projects. Experience must demonstrate wide-ranging capabilities for diverse projects with differing contaminants in various media. EPA Region 2 Superfund projects will have greater importance; (b) Knowledge of and adherence to regulations and practices pertaining to hazardous waste sampling, handling, transportation and disposal including Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), and (National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Experience within EPA Region 2 jurisdiction will have greater importance; (c) Oversight of Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, Remedial Action, and Long Term Response Action projects performed by other parties, in conformance to their respective consent decrees or administrative orders negotiated with EPA; (d) Demonstrated quality management procedures. The effectiveness of the proposed project team (including management structure, coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) will be considered within quality management; (e) Capability in managing cost-reimbursable contracts. The prime A-E firm will demonstrate adequate experience with a cost accounting system for cost-reimbursable contracts. Firms will be evaluated for the degree in which their team possesses experience and competence in these areas (a through e, above). The most highly qualified firms will have extensive experience in all of these areas; (2) Professional qualifications of a firm's staff and team consultants to be assigned to this contract. The education, training, registration, proposed job title, overall and relevant experience, longevity with the firm, and experience of personnel working together with key management and other technical personnel will be considered. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion below. Responding firms should demonstrate the professional qualifications of their staff in these primary disciplines, which are listed in descending order of importance. List professional registrations, if applicable, for the key disciplines: (a) Project Management (b) Chemical Process Engineering; (c) Chemistry; (d) Hydrogeology ; (e) Risk Assessment; (f) Environmental Engineering (g) Civil Engineering; (h) Geotechnical Engineering; (i) Industrial Hygiene; (j) Health Physics; (k) Cost Engineering; (l) Geology; (m) Archaeology; (n) Biology; (o) Mechanical Engineering; (p) Electrical Engineering; (q) Architecture/Landscape Planning; and (r) Structural Engineering; (3 ) Past performance on DoD and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work, management/business relations, and compliance with performance schedules. Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS) is the primary source of information on past performance. ACASS will be queried for all firms submitting a proposal. If deemed appropriate by the evaluation board, performance evaluations for any significant team subcontractors who have previously been prime A-E contractors may also be considered. The board may seek information on past performance from other sources, but is not required to seek other information on the past performance of a firm, if none is available from ACASS. The board will consider the relevancy of each performance evaluation to the proposed contract, including the type of work, performing office, age of the evaluation, and whether subsequent evaluations indicate a change in a firm's performance. A firm that has earned excellent evaluations on recent DoD A-E contracts for similar size, scope, and complexity of projects will be ranked relatively high on past performance; (4) Capacity. The board will consider available capacity of key disciplines identified above from the prime firm and its team consultants to perform work in the required time; (5) Knowledge of the locality. The board will evaluate a firm's familiarity with local conditions. Examples include knowledge of, and experience dealing with, the state and local regulatory agencies, geological features, climatic conditions or local construction methods that are unusual or unique. Work under these contracts may be in a widely dispersed geographic area, therefore, responding firms should demonstrate the extent of their capabilities to serve projects located in both EPA Region 2 and the USACE NWD. (B) Secondary Selection Criteria. The following secondary criteria will only be used as a tie-breaker, if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be co-mingled with the primary criteria in the evaluation. The two secondary selection criteria are listed in descending order of importance: (1) SB and SDB Participation. The extent of participation of SB, SDB, historically black colleges and universities (HBCU), and minority institutions ( MI) will be measured as a percentage of the total anticipated contract effort, regardless of whether the SB, SDB, HBCU, or MI is a prime contractor, subcontractor, or joint venture partner; the greater the participation, the greater the consideration. Large businesses will be expected to place subcontracts to the maximum practical extent with Small and Small Disadvantaged firms in accordance with Public Law 95-507. For informational purposes, the small business size is defined by the limits of NAICS Code 541330. (2) Volume of DoD A-E Contract Awards in the last 12 months. Responding firms should cite all contract numbers, award dates and total negotiated fees for any DoD A-E contract awarded within the past twelve (12) months. Please indicate all task orders and modifications awarded your firm by DoD agencies within the last twelve (12) months under an indefinite delivery type contract. Indicate date of task orders and fee for each. This information will assist in effecting an equitable distribution of DoD A-E contracts among qualified firms, including SB and SDB. 4. Submittal Requirements: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit one (1) original plus five (5) copies of SF 330 (06/2004 edition) for the prime firm and all team consultants. Include the firm's DUNS number in SF 330, Part I, Section B, Block 4. For the ten (10) projects submitted in Section F of the SF 330, a "project" is defined as work performed pursuant to one specific task order of an IDC at one site or multiple sites at a single installation or facility, or work performed pursuant to a site-specific contract for one site or multiple sites within a single installation or facility. An IDC, or the performance of work pursuant to multiple task orders of an IDC, does not represent a "project" within this definition. If the offeror provides a specific task order as its "project," it shall provide the base contract number and the task order number for reference purposes. If the offeror provides a site-specific contract as its "project," it shall provide the contract number for reference purposes. Firms should include information regarding the Secondary Selection Criteria in Section H of the SF 330. Section H is limited to twenty (20) pages with double-sided sheets counting as two pages. For all SF 330 sections, use no smaller than 10 pt. font. No spiral bound documents shall be submitted. Solicitation packages are not provided. This is not a request for proposal. Submittals must be mailed or delivered to the following address not later than July 1, 2011, 4:00 pm Central Time (no faxed or other electronic submittals will be accepted): U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District Attn: CECT-NWK-H (Stephanie Randall) 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, MO 64106-2896 (816) 389-3965 Submit questions, in writing only, to Stephanie Randall at stephanie.d.randall@usace.army.mil. Synopsis also provided in a PDF format. See attached.

C--Architect-Engineer (A-E) Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) For Execution Of The Hazardous, Toxic, And Radioactive Waste (HTRW)/Environmental Mission Of The U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers (USACE) Northwestern Division (CENWD)

Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers | Published February 20, 2008  -  Deadline March 21, 2008
cpvs

The Northwestern Division of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a requirement to acquire Architect-Engineer (A-E) Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste HTRW)/Environmental Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDC) for execution of its environmental mis sion. These A-E contract acquisitions will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part Subpart 36.6. The majority of the work will be located within EPA Region 2 (which includes New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands) and the Northwes tern Division (including Kansas City, Omaha, and Seattle Districts). In support of this effort, the Government intends to award contracts to as many as five unrestricted firms sharing $120 million in total contract capacity. Contract Information: The Government intends to award up to five contracts from this announcement. This announcement is open to all businesses, regardless of size. The period of performance for each contract will be one year, with four (4) one-year option periods. It is antic ipated that the first contract will be awarded not earlier than April 2008. One or more months may elapse between subsequent contract awards. Task orders will be issued as the need arises during the contract period. Task order assignments will be determi ned with consideration of each firms experience, qualifications, past performance, capability and capacity. These task orders may be either firm fixed-price or cost reimbursement type orders. No single task order will exceed $10 million or five years in duration. Firms receiving award will share an ordering amount of $120 million over the life of the contracts. Large businesses will be required to submit a subcontracting plan. The subcontracting goals for the Northwestern Division, which will be consid ered in the negotiation of the contracts, are: at least 70% of a contractors intended subcontract amount be placed with Small Businesses (SB) which includes: at least 6.2% of a contractors intended subcontract amount be placed with Small Disadvantage Bu sinesses (SDB), at least 7% of a contractors intended subcontract amount be placed with Women-owned Small Business (WOSB), at least 9.8% of a contractors intended subcontract amount be placed with HubZones, at least 3% of a contractors intended subcontr act amount to be placed with Veteran-owned, and at least .9% of a contractors intended subcontract amount be placed with Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned SB. The NAICS Code for this procurement is 541330. For the purposes of this procurement a concern is considered a small business if its average annual gross receipts are $4.5 million or less. More than one contract is being awarded for the same scope of work; however, under the Brooks Act, price competition is not allowed for A-E contracts. Therefore, e ach selected firm will be afforded a fair opportunity to be considered for task orders in excess of $3,000 except as provided by FAR 16.505(b)(2), using the following process. When a requirement is identified the Government Project Delivery Team will firs t determine if it is a new requirement or a follow-on effort to an existing remediation project. Due to the nature of the requirements, projects are completed in phases such as preliminary assessment, remedial investigation, feasibility study and then des ign. If a follow-on requirement, every effort will be made to assign the task order to the original A-E as long as they have the capability to perform. For new requirements, the project scope will be reviewed to determine whether the requirement can be a ccomplished using a firm fixed-price task order or whether uncertainties will require the use of a cost reimbursement task order. The experience, qualifications, past performance, capability and capacity will be considered as well as how we are doing in m eeting our small business goals to determine which firm is best qualified to accomplish the work. The period of performance for the IDC will begin on the date of contract award and will be in effect for one twelve-month base period; in addition there are provisions for four twelve-month option periods; if all options are exercised the length of the contract will be five years. The period of performance for task orders awarded under the IDCs will be determined based upon the work requirement, and will be included in the task order solicitation and negotiated award documents. The Service Contract Act, as amended 1965, is applicable to this solicitation and resulti ng contracts and will be incorporated into same. Selections are expected to be made by 18 April 2008. To be eligible for contract award, a firm must be registered in the Department of Defense (DOD) Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet site at http://www.ccr.gov or by contacting the DOD Electronic Commerce Information Center at 1-800-334-3414. Firms are also required to use the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). ORCA is a web-based system that cen tralizes and standardizes the collection, storage, and viewing of many of the representations and certifications required by the Federal Acquisition Regulations and previously found in solicitations. Detailed information can be found in the Help section o f the ORCA website at http://orca.bpn.gov. The help section includes ORCA background information, frequently asked questions (FAQ), the ORCA Handbook, and whom to call for assistance. Project Information: Firms must be capable of performing work on a wide variety of HTRW/ environmental sites in a manner that complies with federal, state and local regulations and laws, and within time frames required. A majority of the work to be performed is expected to be for Superfund projects in EPA Region 2. S pecific needs will be determined based upon project requirements as described in each task order. Project assignments will typically require performance on-site and in an office setting. Assignments will include, but not be limited to: site investigation s, subsurface exploration, chemical sampling, testing and analyses, hazard evaluations, feasibility and other engineering studies and reports, archaeological investigations and mitigation, wetlands determination and mitigation studies, groundwater and othe r modeling, contaminant fate and transport analysis, HTRW remedial designs, preparation of plans and specifications, cost estimating, value engineering screenings and studies, field inspections, verification of existing conditions, pilot studies, surveying and mapping, community relations, construction-phase services (engineering design during construction, checking shop drawings), and working on a variety of hazardous waste and other environmental type projects, including radioactive and mixed wastes, ener gy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, use of recovered materials, underground storage tanks and fueling systems, habitat restoration and mitigation, and sites potentially contaminated with military munitions. For on-site investigations, firms must provide personnel with current health and safety training, as required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Selection Criteria: (A) Selection of as many as five unrestricted firms will be based on the following pr imary criteria, listed in descending order of importance: (1) Specialized experience and technical competence of the firms team demonstrated during the past five (5) years in the broad range of environmental work required for this contract including (a) I nvestigation, planning, design, and construction phase services for a variety of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste cleanup projects. Experience must demonstrate wide-ranging capabilities for diverse projects with differing contaminants in various me dia. EPA Region 2 Superfund projects will have greater importance; (b) Knowledge of and adherence to regulations and practices pertaining to hazardous waste sa mpling, handling, transportation and disposal including RCRA, CERCLA, CWA, TSCA, and NEPA. Experience within EPA Region 2 jurisdiction will have greater importance; (c) Oversight of Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, Remedial Acti on, and Long Term Response Action projects performed by other parties, in conformance to their respective consent decrees or administrative orders negotiated with EPA; (d) Demonstrated quality management procedures. The effectiveness of the proposed proje ct team (including management structure, coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) will be considered within quality management. Firms will be evaluated for the degree in which their team possesses experi ence and competence in these four areas (a through d, above). The most highly qualified firms will have extensive experience in all of these areas; (2) Professional qualifications of firms staff and team consultants to be assigned to this contract. The education, training, registration, overall and relevant experience, longevity with the firm, and experience of personnel working together with key management and other technical personnel will be considered. This criterion is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the key personnel and not the number of personnel, which is addressed under the capacity criterion below. Responding firms should demonstrate the professional qualifications of their staff in these primary disciplines, which are listed i n descending order of importance. List professional registrations, if applicable, for the disciplines: (a) Environmental engineering; (b) Chemical process engineering; (c) Chemistry; (d) Risk Assessment; (e) Hydrogeology; (f) Civil Engineering; (g) Geotec hnical engineering; (h) Industrial hygiene; (i) Health physics; (j) Cost engineering; (k) Geology; (l) Archaeology; (m) Biology; (n) Mechanical engineering; (o) Electrical engineering; (p) Architecture/Landscape Planning; and (q) Structural Engineering; (3 ) Past performance on DOD and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules. ACASS is the primary source of information on past performance. ACASS will be queried for all firms submitting a propos al. When deemed appropriate by the evaluation board, performance evaluations for any significant team subcontractors who have previously been prime A-E contractors may also be considered. The board may seek information on past performance from other sourc es, but is not required to seek other information on the past performance of a firm, if none is available from ACASS. The board will consider the relevancy of each performance evaluation to the proposed contract, including the type of work, performing off ice, age of the evaluation, and whether subsequent evaluations indicate a change in a firm's performance. A firm that has earned excellent evaluations on recent DOD A-E contracts for similar projects will be ranked relatively high on past performance; (4 ) Capacity. The board will consider available capacity of key disciplines from the prime firm and its team consultants to perform work in the required time; (5) Knowledge of the locality. The board will evaluate a firm's familiarity with local conditions . Examples include knowledge of, and experience dealing with, the state and local regulatory agencies, geological features, climatic conditions or local construction methods that are unusual or unique. Work under these contracts may be in a widely dispers ed geographic area, therefore, responding firms should demonstrate the extent of their capabilities to serve projects located in both EPA Region II and the USACE Northwestern Division. (B) Secondary Selection Criteria. The following secondary criteria wi ll only be used as a tie-breaker, if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be co-mingled with the primary crite ria in the evaluation. The two secondary selection criteria are listed in descending order of importance: (1) SB and SDB Participation. The extent of participation of SB, SDB, historically black colleges and universities (HBCU), and minority institutions ( MI) will be measured as a percentage of the total anticipated contract effort, regardless of whether the SB, SDB, HBCU, or MI is a prime contractor, subcontractor, or joint venture partner; the greater the participation, the greater the consideration. Larg e businesses will be expected to place subcontracts to the maximum practical extent with Small and Small Disadvantaged firms in accordance with Public Law 95-507. For informational purposes, the small business size is defined by the limits of NAICS Code 5 41330. (2) Volume of DOD Contract Awards. The overall most highly qualified firms will not be rejected solely in the interest of equitable distribution of contracts. Responding firms should cite all contract numbers, award dates and total negotiated fees f or any DOD contract awarded within the past twelve (12) months. Please indicate all task orders and modifications awarded your firm by DOD agencies within the last twelve (12) months under an indefinite delivery type contract. Indicate date of task orders and fee for each. Submittal Requirements: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit one (1) original plus five (5) copies of SF330 (06/2004 edition) for the prime firm and all team consultants. Include the firm's ACASS number in SF 330, Part I, Section B, Block 4. Section H of the SF 330 is limited to twenty (20) pages with double-sided sheets counting as two pages. For all SF 330 sections, use no smaller than 10 pt. font. A contract-specific Quality Control Pla n will be prepared and submitted by the A-E after contract award, but is not required with this submission. Solicitation packages are not provided. This is not a request for proposal. Submittals must be mailed or delivered to the following address not la ter than 21 March 2008, 2:00 p.m. local time: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District, Attn: CENWK-CT-H (Thomas), 757 Federal Building, 601 East 12th Street, Kansas City, MO 64106-2896. No faxed or other electronic submittals will be accepted. Contact Ms. Shelley Thomas, Contract Specialist, at Shelley.Thomas@usace.army.mil if you have any questions regarding this announcement.

Project Mid Term Evaluator for the Fifth Operational Phase of the GEF-Small Grants Programme (Filipino Nationals only)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published December 5, 2016  -  Deadline January 15, 2017
cpvs

INTRODUCTIONThis is the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the UNDP-GEF Midterm Review (MTR) of the full-sized project titled Fifth Operational Phase of the GEF-Small Grants Programme (SGP-5) in the Philippines (PIMS# 4517) implemented through the UNDP and the Biodiversity Management Bureau of the DENR, which is to be undertaken in 2016. The project started on the Project Document signature date and is in its third year of implementation. In line with the UNDP-GEF Guidance on MTRs, this MTR process was initiated before the submission of the second Project Implementation Report (PIR). This ToR sets out the expectations for this MTR. The MTR process must follow the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND INFORMATIONThe GEF Small Grants Programme (GEF SGP) is a GEF Corporate Programme implemented by UNDP to provide financial and technical support to communities and civil society organizations (CSOs) to meet the overall objective of “Global environmental benefits secured through community-based initiatives and actions”. Launched in 1992 with 33 participating countries and now at 130, GEF SGP is rooted in the conviction that community-driven sustainable development initiatives that support innovative livelihoods and local empowerment can generate and maintain global environmental benefits.The Philippines was one of the pilot countries of the Small Grants Programme (SGP) and was introduced to Philippine NGOs and CBOs in 1992. The SGP is a grant facility for NGOs and CBOs in support of their community-based resource management initiatives. The programme provides grants of up to USD 50,000 directly to local communities, including indigenous people, community-based organizations and other non-governmental groups for projects in GEF focal areas. Since its inception, it has funded 293 projects amounting to USD 9,451,453. Through more than two decades and four operational phases of grant giving its list of grantees now comprises over 200 civil society organizations (CSOs) from all over the country whose concerns cover GEF’s main focal themes. For the first four operational phases of the SGP in the Philippines, 70% of SGP funds was accessed by CSOs to pursue projects in the Biodiversity Conservation focal area of GEF-UNDP, while one 30% was geared towards other focal areas (16% multi-focal area; 13% climate change; 1% POPs projects). The biodiversity conservation focal area is the main focus for the Fifth Operation Phase (SGP-5) of the GEF Small Grants Programme in the Philippines.. In 2008, the GEF approved an “upgrading” policy that stipulated that SGP Country Programs with more than 15 years of operations and over USD 6.0 million in grant disbursements would receive their funding through country-led STAR allocation ns i.e. as a Full-Size Project. These countries represent some of the most mature, experienced, and successful SGP Country Programmes, with the most developed civil society networks and multistakeholder partnerships. The SGP Philippines Country Programme upgraded during the GEF Fifth Operational Phase (together with Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, India, Mexico, Kenya, Pakistan).The GEF approved the Fifth Operational Phase the Small Grants Programme in the Philippines (SGP-5 project) amounting to USD 4.5 million in June 2012. The Project Document was signed by NEDA, UNDP and DENR in June 2013. SGP-5 supports community-based biodiversity conservation initiatives in three priority sites: Palawan, Samar Island (Samar, Northern Samar and Eastern Samar), and Sierra Madre Mountain Range (Laguna, Rizal, Quezon, Bulacan, Nueva Ecija, Nueva Vizcaya, Aurora, Quirino, Isabela and Cagayan). SGP-5 aims to (1) improve the sustainability of protected areas through community actions by building effective models for community-based governance; (2) mainstream biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in the management of production landscapes and seascapes by local communities; and, (3) increase the capacity of SGP partner NGOs, POs and CBOs to diagnose and understand the complex and dynamic nature of global environmental problems and to develop local solutions. Individual small grant projects under SGP-5 will contribute concrete outputs to the achievement of the following outcomes:Component 1: Community-based actions improve the sustainability of protected areas[1]Outcome 1: Effective models for community-based governance of protected areas are demonstratedComponent 2: Mainstream biodiversity conservation and sustainable use into production landscapes, seascapes and sectors (PLS)[2]Outcome 2: Community-managed landscapes and seascapes explicitly integrate biodiversity conservation objectivesOutcome 3: Alternative biodiversity friendly agriculture, fisheries and forestry products produced and marketed by 30 communitiesComponent 3: Cross-cutting Capacity Development and Knowledge ManagementOutcome 4: Increased capacity of GEF-SGP stakeholders to diagnose and understand the complex and dynamic nature of global environmental problems and to develop local solutionsOutcome 5: Enhanced capacities of GEF-SGP grantees to monitor and evaluate their projects and environmental trendsThe Project is being managed by the Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB, formerly PAWB) which has established a Project Management Unit (PMU) to implement certain outputs and coordinate the work of partners in pilot sites. OBJECTIVESThe MTR will assess progress towards the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes as specified in the Project Document, and assess early signs of project success or failure with the goal of identifying the necessary changes to be made in order to set the project on-track to achieve its intended results. The MTR will also review the project’s strategy, its risks to sustainability. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGYThe MTR must provide evidence based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The MTR team will review all relevant sources of information including documents prepared during the preparation phase (i.e. PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, UNDP Environmental & Social Safeguard Policy, the Project Document, project reports including Annual Project Review/PIRs, project budget revisions, lesson learned reports, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the team considers useful for this evidence-based review).The MTR team is expected to follow a collaborative and participatory approach[1] ensuring close engagement with government counterparts, in particular the GEF Operational Focal Point, UNDP Country Office, PAWB and PMU, UNDP-GEF Global Coordinator for the SGP Upgrading Country Programs based in New York and key stakeholders.Engagement of stakeholders is vital to a successful MTR.[2] Stakeholder involvement should include interviews with stakeholders who have project responsibilities, including but not limited to; executing agencies, senior officials and task team/ component leaders, key experts and consultants in the subject area, Project Board, project stakeholders, academia, local government and CSOs, etc. Additionally, the MTR team is expected to conduct a field mission to Manila and selected project sites. Annex A is the list of SGP Projects in its 3 priority sites – Palawan, Sierra Madre and Samar.Interviews will be held with the government Implementing Partner (IP) – BMB of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR); as well as other agencies (National Commission on Indigenous Peoples); grantee NGOs; local government units; local and indigenous peoples’ communities; relevant consultants and other partner organizations. The MTR consultant will also hold discussions with major donor organizations with on-going and planned initiatives in the sector such as but not limited to GIZ’s Protected Areas Management Enhancement (PAME) Project, USAID’s Biodiversity and Watersheds Improved for Stronger Economy and Ecosystems Resilience Project (B+WISER), USAID’s Ecosystems Improved for Sustainable Fisheries (ECOFISH), the Philippine Government’s National Greening Program and Coastal and Marine Ecosystem Rehabilitation Program (CMERP) (both of DENR) and People’s Survival Fund (of the Climate Change Commission), UNDP’s Marine Key Biodiversity Areas (MKBA) Project, BIOFIN and ICCA projects.Taking into account the landscape approach of the Philippines SGP Country Program, and building on the experience of UNDP’s COMDEKS community-based landscape planning approach, the Upgrading Country Programs in OP6 are adopting a community-based landscape approach as their core programming framework, building the capacities of community organizations to take collective action for adaptive landscape management for social and ecological resilience. GEF funding in OP6 will provide small grants to NGOs and community organizations to develop landscape management strategies and implement community projects in pursuit of strategic landscape level outcomes related to ecosystem services and biodiversity, sustainable productions systems and food security, sustainable livelihoods, and landscape governance. Funding will also be available for initiatives to build the organizational capacities of specific community groups as well as landscape level organizations to plan and manage complex initiatives and test, evaluate and disseminate community level innovations. The Mid-Term Review should provide recommendations on potential linkages with the community-based landscape management approach piloted by the COMDEKS Programme and currently being replicated by the portofolio of OP6 Upgrading Country Programmes.The final MTR report should describe the full MTR approach taken and the rationale for the approach making explicit the underlying assumptions, challenges, strengths and weaknesses about the methods and approach of the review. SCOPE OF MTRI.Project StrategyProject design:Review the problem addressed by the project and the underlying assumptions. Review the effect of any incorrect assumptions or changes to the context to achieving the project results as outlined in the Project Document.Review the relevance of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results. Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?Review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects)?Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes?Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.Results Framework/Logframe:Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s logframe indicators and targets, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary.Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc...) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis.Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively. Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits. II. Progress Towards ResultsReview the logframe indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red). please refer to the attached TOR for the Table on \"Progress Towards Results Matrix (Achievement of outcomes against End-of-project Targets)\"In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the Baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project.By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.III. Project Implementation and Adaptive ManagementManagement Arrangements:Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document. Have changes been made and are they effective? Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear? Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner? Recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement.Work Planning:Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved.Are work-planning processes results-based? If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results?Examine the use of the project’s results framework/ logframe as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start. Finance and co-finance:Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions. Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions.Does the project have the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds?Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project? Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans?Project-level Monitoring and Evaluation Systems:Review the monitoring tools currently being used: Do they provide the necessary information? Do they involve key partners? Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems? Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective? Are additional tools required? How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget. Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation? Are these resources being allocated effectively?Stakeholder Engagement:Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project? Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives?Reporting:Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board.Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?)Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.Communications:Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?)For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.IV. SustainabilityValidate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Management Module are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date. If not, explain why.In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability:Financial risks to sustainability:What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)?Socio-economic risks to sustainability:Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project? Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/ transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future?Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability:Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits? While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/ mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place.Environmental risks to sustainability:Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?V. Conclusions & RecommendationsThe MTR team will include a section of the report setting out the MTR’s evidence-based conclusions, in light of the findings.[1]Recommendations should be succinct suggestions for critical intervention that are specific, measurable, achievable, and relevant. A recommendation table should be put in the report’s executive summary. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for guidance on a recommendation table.The MTR team should make no more than 15 recommendations total.VI. RatingsThe MTR team will include its ratings of the project’s results and brief descriptions of the associated achievements in a MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table in the Executive Summary of the MTR report. See Annex E for ratings scales. No rating on Project Strategy and no overall project rating is required. Please refer to the attached TOR for the table on \"MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table for Fifth Operational Phase of the GEF-Small Grants Programme (SGP-5) in the Philippines.\" TIMEFRAMEThe total duration of the MTR will be approximately 10 weeks starting January 2017, and shall not exceed four (4) months from when the consultant(s) are hired. DELIVERABLESMTR Inception Report - MTR team clarifies objectives and methods of Midterm ReviewPresentation - Initial FindingsDraft Final Report - Full report (using guidelines on content outlined in Annex B) with annexesFinal Report - Revised report with audit trail detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final MTR report ARRANGEMENTSThe principal responsibility for managing this MTR resides with the Commissioning Unit. The Commissioning Unit for this project’s MTR is UNDP Philippines.The commissioning unit will contract the consultants and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the MTR team. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the MTR team to provide all relevant documents, set up stakeholder interviews, and arrange field visits. TEAM COMPOSITIONA team of two independent consultants will conduct the MTR - one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions globally) and one team expert, usually from the country of the project. The consultants cannot have participated in the project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with project’s related activities. The National Consultant will primarily support the International Consultant who plays the Team Leader in the conduct of the evaluation mission. He/she is expected to do the tasks but not limited to the following:Assist the team leader and provide inputs in the preparation of the MTE Inception Report and Mid-term Evaluation Report;Assist in the conduct of the evaluation mission especially in the gathering and analysis of data and information;Provide the national context in the analysis of SGP’s results and accomplishments;Provide recommendations for improvement considering the national context where SGP operates;The Evaluation Team is expected to discuss among themselves their detailed division of work and should be clearly articulated in the MTE Inception Report.The National Consultant will report to the Team Leader (International Consultant). The UNDP CO and CPMU will provide support to the development of the evaluation work plan in consultation with key project partners. The project team (PMU) will serve as the reference group for the evaluation and ensure the monitoring of satisfactory completion of evaluation deliverables.CPMU will provide office space and access to office services such as, internet and printing. Evaluator/s should provide their own computer and communications equipment.In consultation with the Evaluation Team and as requested, the CPMU personnel will make available all relevant documentation and provide contact information to key project partners and stakeholders, and facilitate contact where needed. The team will also assist in organizing any briefing de-briefing meetings including coordination of stakeholders’ input in the evaluation draft report. QUALIFICATIONS OF SUCCESSFUL CONSULTANTEducationAdvanced degree in environmental management, community development, development economics or any related courses.Work ExperienceMinimum of least 10 years’ experience in the implementation of protected area management, PA system wide planning and monitoring, capacity building for PA management, and PA financing sustainability.An effective evaluator with demonstrated experience in conducting international development evaluations; prior experience in GEF Project evaluations would be an advantage;Demonstrated strong knowledge of Monitoring and Evaluation methods for development projects; knowledge of UNDP’s results-based management orientation and practices;Familiarity with biodiversity conservation issues in the Philippines;Knowledge and experience in community-based and CSO-initiative biodiversity conservation and management initiatives in the Philippines;Demonstrated experience with implementation and/or evaluation of capacity-building efforts in developing countries, in the area of biodiversity conservation and sustainable forest management.LanguageFluency in the English language and excellent oral and written communication skills.CompetenciesDemonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;Treats all people fairly without favoritism;Expertise in data collection and analysisAbility to work under pressure and tight deadlines;Strong analytical and research skills; andExcellent organizational, and communication skills; PAYMENT MODALITIES AND SPECIFICATIONSConsultants will be contracted by UNDP and remunerated according to the reviewed and accepted financial proposal. The contract will be output-based and payment issued only upon delivery of satisfactory outputs/milestones.10% - Following submission and acceptance of the MTR mission Inception Report40% - Following submission and approval of the 1ST draft MTR report50% - Following submission and approval (UNDP CO and SGP RTA) of the final MTR report CRITERIA FOR SELECTION PROCESSThe offer will be evaluated based on Combined Scoring Method – where the qualifications and methodology will be weighted a maximum of 70% and combined with the price offer which will be weighted maximum of 30%. RECOMMENDED PRESENTATION OF OFFER AND APPLICATION PROCESSApplicants are requested to submit the following documents to procurement.ph@undp.org.Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability that indicates the all-inclusive lumpsum contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template provided; If an Offeror is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the process of releasing him/her to UNDP under Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the Offeror must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP.Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references; Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a methodology, if applicable, on how they will approach and complete the assignment.Application requirements should be emailed on or before 15 Janaury 2017, close of business, Manila Time. [1] Alternatively, MTR conclusions may be integrated into the body of the report.[1] For ideas on innovative and participatory Monitoring and Evaluation strategies and techniques, see UNDP Discussion Paper: Innovations in Monitoring & Evaluating Results, 05 Nov 2013.[2] For more stakeholder engagement in the M&E process, see the UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results, Chapter 3, pg. 93.[1] This component will help to support the development and implementation of community-based protected area models as a complementary form of PA management to NIPAS.[2] This component will support community initiatives in understanding and consequently integrating the principles, practices, and strategies of biodiversity conservation in the community’s economic production activities.