C--COMPREHENSIVE LONG-TERM ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION NAVY (CLEAN), PRIMARILY IN THE NAVFAC MID-ATLANTIC HAMPTON ROADS AND MARINE CORPS IPTs, WASHINGTON, NORTHWEST, SOUTHWEST AND EURAFSWA AORs AND PUERTO RICO
Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command | Published January 8, 2015 - Deadline February 9, 2015
ALL INFORMATION NEEDED FOR INTERESTED PARTIES TO SUBMIT A STANDARD FORM (SF) 330, ARCHITECT ENGINEER QUALIFICATIONS IS CONTAINED HEREIN. THERE IS NO SEPARATE RFP PACKAGE TO DOWNLOAD.
This procurement is for Architectural-Engineering (A-E) Services and will be procured in accordance with the Selection of Architects and Engineers Statute as implemented by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6. This procurement is being solicited on an UNRESTRICTED basis; therefore, replies to this notice are requested from all business concerns. The Selection of Architects and Engineers Statute requires agencies to conduct discussions with at least three qualified firms during the selection of firms for Architect-Engineering contracts.
The Sources Sought Notice for this requirement, dated 27 February 2014, did not reveal at least three small businesses that possess the required capabilities and capacity to accomplish the work expected under this contract. FAR 36.101(b) states, “When a requirement in this part is inconsistent with a requirement in another part of this regulation, this Part 36 shall take precedence if the acquisition of construction or architect-engineer services is involved;” therefore, the “rule of two” normally used to determine whether a requirement can be set-aside for small business as described in FAR 19 does not apply to this procurement; therefore, Part 36 takes precedence over Part 19, including FAR 19.502-2.
The NAVFAC Atlantic small business office and Small Business Administration (SBA) Procurement Center Representative (PCR) concur with this decision.
This procurement is a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) Architect-Engineer (A-E) Contract for Environmental Engineering Support Services for Comprehensive Long-Term Environmental Action Navy (CLEAN) in Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Atlantic’s Area of Responsibility (AOR), primarily in the NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic Hampton Roads and Marine Corps Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) AOR, NAVFAC Washington AOR, NAVFAC Northwest AOR, NAVFAC Southwest AOR, NAVFAC Europe Africa Southwest Asia (EURAFSWA) AOR, and Puerto Rico.
The general scope of this requirement covers A-E services to provide program management and technical environmental services in support of the Department of the Navy’s (DON) Environmental Restoration Program (ERP), including the Installation Restoration Program (IRP), the Munitions Response Program (MRP), and other similar programs at any DON or Marine Corps site within NAVFAC Atlantic’s AOR. The principal geographical regions encompassed by this contract include the states of Alaska, California, Maryland, North Carolina, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Puerto Rico, the area of the District of Columbia, and, to a lesser extent, Wyoming, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Europe and other Department of Defense (DOD) installations nationwide and overseas.
The contractor may also, on occasion, be tasked to provide services described herein to any NAVFAC Command, any DOD activity, or other Federal agency activities in any geographic location.
Firms shall provide a full range of A-E environmental services for program management and technical services including the following:
a. Those in support of the DOD’s ERP in compliance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976. Support of Navy and Marine Corps Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) efforts is also included.
Services include, but are not limited to: performance of site management plans, community relation plans, preliminary assessments, site inspections, remedial investigations, feasibility studies, RCRA facility investigations, corrective measures studies, interim measure plans, remedial and removal action designs, environmental assessments, risk assessments (both human health and ecological), contamination characterization, sampling, laboratory testing, presentations at restoration advisory boards (RABs), participation on partnering teams with regulators, operation and maintenance support, Geographical Information System (GIS) development and maintenance, and documentation preparation for facility support contracts and Title II management of remedial action implementation (including subcontract award and management); with emphasis on the accelerated schedules and increased sensitivity, visibility, and regulatory political and community concerns at Naval and Marine Corps installations.
b. Those in support of the MRP.
Services include the entire suite of Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) investigation stages consistent with CERCLA, progressing from a preliminary assessment/site investigation to a remedial investigation/feasibility study through the remedial design, all in accordance with explosive safety standards. Services also include methodologies for UXO detection, clearance, removal, and safety.
c. Those in support of addressing large and/or complex Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants (POL) sites with multiple sources and distribution lines, including assessment characterization, testing monitoring, and remedial action design and oversight.
d. Those in support of assessments, studies, investigations, and remedial designs that include other environmental programs such as air, water, waste water, solid waste, asbestos and hazardous substance/waste management, Range Sustainability Environmental Program Assessment (RSEPA), and complex compliance requirements requiring the integration of knowledge from several media and statutes in the United States and abroad.
e. Those in support of expedited response actions.
f. Those in support of the Navy Installation Restoration Information System (NIRIS) development and maintenance, Web page development and maintenance, GIS, and graphic support.
The contract requires that the selected firms have on-line access to e-mail via the Internet for routine exchange of correspondence.
Attention is directed to FAR subpart 9.5 and the following provisions. An organizational conflict of interest may exist, if a firm has performed as an Environmental Response Action prime contractor and performs as a CLEAN prime or subcontractor at the same site. An organizational conflict of interest may also exist on a project basis for firms who have performed as prime contractors on other Navy environmental engineering contracts. Firms are advised that NFAS 5252.209-9300 Alt I Organizational Conflicts of Interest will be included in the contract. The restrictions described herein shall apply to the contractor and its affiliates, joint venture partners, consultants and subcontracts under this contract.
Form 330 (SF-330)—The A-E must demonstrate its and each key consultant’s qualifications with respect to the published evaluation criteria for all services with particular emphasis on work in the geographical locations as described above.
Criteria 1 through 3 are considered most important and are equal among themselves; criteria 4 through 7 are slightly less important and are equal among themselves; criterion 8 is of lesser importance and criterion 9 is the least important and will be used as a tiebreaker among technically equal firms.
Criterion 1—Specialized Experience (SF 330, Sections F and H):
Demonstrate specialized experience of the firm and/or proposed consultants that was substantially completed between September 2009 and August 2014. Demonstrate specialized experience in performing multiple, simultaneous projects involving field investigations and preparing studies/analysis/work plans/remediation oversight for environmental restoration projects and other technical support services.
Demonstrate DOD, Federal Agency, and private experience relating to compliance with environmental laws and regulations for CERCLA (both NPL and non NPL), RCRA, Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC), National Contingency Plan (NCP), MRP and interfacing with regulatory agencies (federal/state/local/international). Specialized experience should focus on the following geographic areas: Alaska, California, Maryland, North Carolina, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, and, to a lesser extent, Wyoming, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Europe and other DOD installations nationwide and overseas. Recent experience with, and knowledge of, permits, construction material, and practices in the contracted areas should be demonstrated.
Recent experience documenting innovative cleanup strategies and successful attainment of regulatory closure for CERCLA or RCRA sites should be included. A maximum of 10 projects in total will be evaluated. For submittal purposes, a project may be a single contract task order, a stand-alone contract, or an ID/IQ-type contract. ID/IQ contracts may be ongoing, with task orders within that contract that were substantially completed during the specified time frame.
Note: If the firm is a JV, information should be submitted as a joint venture; however, if there is no information for the joint venture, information should be submitted for each joint venture partner up to a total of 10 projects.
If a project was performed by a joint venture, and all joint venture partners are not on the team proposed for this contract, the firm/team should specifically address the work performed by the joint venture partner offering/teaming on this contract. Likewise, if the firm/team member worked as a subcontractor on a project, the description should clearly describe the work actually performed by the firm/team member and the roles and responsibilities of each on the project, rather than the work performed on the project as a whole. If the project description does not clearly delineate the work performed by the entity/entities offering/teaming on this contract, the project may be eliminated from consideration.
Criterion 2—Professional Qualifications (SF330, Sections E, F and G):
Professional qualifications and capabilities of the staff to be assigned to this contract must include:
a. Experience from September 2009 to August 2014 in environmental technical disciplines, project management, performing field investigations, and preparing studies/analysis/work plans/remediation oversight for environmental restoration projects and other technical support services.
Describe experience pertaining to CERCLA, RCRA, MRP, and radiological investigations.
b. Interfacing with regulatory agencies (federal/state/local), with emphasis in Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho, Maryland, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and in other DOD installations nationwide and overseas.
c. Expertise and experience in program management and demonstrated partnering/ teambuilding skills with regulatory and similar agencies.
d. Depth of professional staff in delivery order level project manager and senior level managers. Demonstrate active professional engineering registration(s) as well as other relevant registration(s) and/or the ability to obtain registration(s) in Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho, Maryland, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
Resumes for key personnel are limited to one page each and should cite project-specific experience and role in this contract.
Criterion 3—Past Performance (SF 330, Sections F and H):
The Government will evaluate past performance (both with Government agencies and private industry) in terms of cost control, overall quality of work, quality of technical data and conclusions, innovation and optimization, compliance with performance schedules, stakeholder and customer satisfaction, management and administration of DOD contracts, and reliability of the firm’s quality assurance and quality control program, with an emphasis on past performance on projects offered in Criterion 1.
Evaluating past performance and experience will include information provided on Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) for Criterion 1 projects and may include other information provided by the firm, customer inquiries, Government databases, and other information available to the Government (including contacts with points-of-contact provided in other criteria). Failure to provide requested data, accessible points-of-contact, or valid phone numbers could negatively impact a firm’s evaluation under this criterion. If the firm is a JV, information should be submitted as a JV. If there is no information for the JV, information should be submitted for each JV partner. Document recent awards and commendations (do not submit copies).
Criterion 4—Safety (SF330, Section H):
Submit the following information: (For a partnership or JV, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Experience Modification Rate (EMR) and Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)
(1) EMR: For the three previous complete calendar years (2011-2013), submit the EMR (comparing annual losses in insurance claims against policy premiums over a three year period). If there is no EMR, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element.
Lower EMRs will be given greater weight in the evaluation.
(2) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) DART Rate: For the three previous complete calendar years (2011-2013), submit the OSHA DART Rate, as defined by OSHA. If there is no OSHA DART Rate, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART Rate data and upward or downward trends should be addressed as part of this element. Lower OSHA DART Rates will be given greater weight in the evaluation.
(3) Technical Approach for Safety: Describe the safety plan and how it will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors, as a part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors.
Also, describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices within the firm and at all subcontractor levels. The Safety Narrative shall be limited to two pages.
Criterion 5—Program Management (SF330, Section H):
Describe/Demonstrate the following:
a. Ability to concurrently perform and manage multiple complex projects (approximately 60–90 contract task orders) in different locations, to meet schedules, and to control direct and indirect costs.
b. Ability to expeditiously submit technical and cost proposals, negotiate, and commence work immediately upon award of a CTO.
c. Ability to coordinate and work effectively with other contractors involved in NAVFAC Atlantic environmental programs.
d. Logical identification of explicit assignment of responsibilities among corporate team members.
e. Proposed location of the program management office and other key staff members, how this organization will be advantageous to the Government, and a detailed description of the organizational structure and how it will function.
Criterion 6—Quality Control (SF330, Section H):
Describe the firm’s corporate quality control program and proposed approach for this contract.
Further describe the firm’s process and procedures, authorities assigned to the firm’s quality control manager, and how the firm’s program extends to subcontractors (including laboratories and drillers). The quality control program shall demonstrate knowledge of applicable regulatory requirements related to quality control.
Criterion 7—Capacity (SF330, Section H):
Describe the firm’s capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Describe the firm’s ability to provide continuity of service with no or minimal program disruption and cost impact to projects initiated under existing NAVFAC Atlantic contracts. Indicate the firms present workload and the project team’s availability (including consultants) for the specified contract performance period.
Indicate specialized equipment; particularly related to state of the art technology. Include the firm’s ability to obtain security clearance(s) for its key personnel.
Criterion 8—Small Business Goals (SF330, Section H):
Firms will be evaluated in terms of their extent to identify and commit to Small Business (SB), SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), SDVOSB, and, if applicable, Historically Black Colleges or Universities and Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI) in performance of this contract, whether as a joint venture, teaming arrangement, or subcontractor. The Government will evaluate proposals based on two elements: (a) Past performance in utilization of small business concerns, and (b) Participation of small business concerns for this requirement.
In support of element (a), all firms shall provide historical data on utilization of SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB, and HBCU/MI concerns. Large Business firms shall submit three “final” or “most recent” Individual Subcontracting Reports (ISRs) for similar contracts of relative size that show how the various types of small business firms noted above were utilized. If subcontracting goals were not met, provide an explanation. If Individual Subcontracting Reports were not applicable to the similar contracts, large business firms shall submit other documentation showing their utilization of the various types of small business firms for their contracts. Small Business firms shall also submit documentation showing their utilization of the various types of small business firms for similar contracts of relative size.
In support of element (b), large businesses shall submit a draft Small Business Subcontracting Plan, in which they will be evaluated on the extent to which they identify and commit to the published Small Business Subcontracting Goals established by the Secretary of the Navy. Demonstrate the plan to meet these goals: FY15 Goals: Small Business (SB) - 66.80%, HUBZone (HUB) - 8.94%, Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) - 17.27%, Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB) - 15.30%, Veteran Owned Small Businesses (VOSB) - 3.03%, and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) - 3.03%; FY16 Goals: Small Business (SB) - 66.94%, HUBZone (HUB) - 9.03%, Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) - 17.44%, Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB) - 15.45%, Veteran Owned Small Businesses (VOSB) - 3.06%, and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) - 3.06%; FY17 Goals: Small Business (SB) - 67.07%, HUBZone (HUB) - 9.12%, Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) - 17.62%, Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB) - 15.61%, Veteran Owned Small Businesses (VOSB) - 3.09%, and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) - 3.09%; FY18 Goals: Small Business (SB) - 67.20%, HUBZone (HUB) - 9.21%, Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) - 17.79%, Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB) - 15.77%, Veteran Owned Small Businesses (VOSB) - 3.12%, and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) - 3.12%; FY19 Goals: Small Business (SB) - 67.33%, HUBZone (HUB) - 9.30%, Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) - 17.97%, Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB) - 15.93%, Veteran Owned Small Businesses (VOSB) - 3.15%, and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) - 3.15%.
If a large business firm is selected for award, a Small Business Subcontracting Plan, in accordance with FAR 19.7 and DFAR 219.7, will be required and incorporated into the contract award.
A draft Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not required from small business firms; however, small business firms shall submit similar information on the extent to which they identify and commit to subcontracting to large business (LB), SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZoneSB, VOSB, SDVOSB, and HBCU/MI if applicable in the performance of this contract.
The attached Small Business Subcontracting Plan template shall be used by large business firms to complete the draft subcontracting plan. Firms shall submit their draft Small Business Subcontracting Plans utilizing this template, and ONLY this template.
Criterion 9—Volume of Work (SF330, Section H):
Firms will be evaluated in terms of work previously awarded to the firm by the DOD within the past 12 months (January 2014-December 2014) with the objective of effecting an equitable distribution of DOD A-E contracts among qualified A-E firms, including small and small disadvantaged business firms and firms that have not had prior DOD contracts.
State the dollar amount of work awarded to the firm by the DOD within the past 12 months; JVs should list the amount awarded to the JV entity as well as the amounts awarded to individual JV members for that time period. If the firm has had no DOD work within the previously 12 months, the firm should so state.
The small business size standard classification is NAICS code 541330, Environmental Engineering Services ($15,000,000). The resulting contract will be a CPAF contract for a base period of one year and four one-year option periods. The ceiling for this procurement is established at $240,000,000. The guaranteed minimum is established at $200,000 for the base period. The options may be exercised within the time frame specified in the resultant contract at the sole discretion of the Government subject to work load and/or satisfaction of the A-E performance under the subject contract.
There will be no dollar limit per task order and no dollar limit per year. The firm selected will be the most highly qualified in accordance with the evaluation criteria. The contract will be CPAF with ID/IQ provisions. Individual contract task orders will be issued with statements of work which describe the nature of work to be performed and requirements for the period of performance. The Government makes no representation as to the number of task orders or the actual amount of work to be ordered.
All contractors are advised that registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) database is required prior to award of a contract. Failure to register in the SAM database may render your firm ineligible for award.
For more information, check the SAM website: https://www.sam.gov.
The following certifications and registrations are also mandatory prior to award of a contract: Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) @ https://orca.bpn.gov/ and Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) @ https://wawf.eb.mil/.
Projects submitted in the SF-330 shall be projects completed by the proposed team members. Projects not performed by the proposed team members will be excluded from evaluation consideration. It is anticipated that interviews for slated firms will be conducted in Norfolk, VA.
FIRMS WHO ARE OFFERING AS A JOINT VENTURE SHOULD INCLUDE WITH THEIR SUBMISSION A COPY OF THE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT.
FAILURE TO INCLUDE THE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT WILL RESULT IN THE FIRM’S ELIMINATION FROM FURTHER EVALUATION.
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Architect-Engineer firms that meet the requirements described in this announcement are invited to submit a completed SF-330. The SF-330 should be typed, one sided, at least 12-pitch font or larger, and Part I shall not exceed 70 single-sided 8.5 by 11 inch pages (two 11 by 17 inch foldout sheets may be substituted for 8.5 by 11 sheets). Introductions shall not be included in Sections E and F. Please include your and all team members’ DUNS, CAGE, and TIN numbers in Block 30 of the SF-330. In accordance with the Brooks Act, the A-E firm must be a registered/licensed architectural and/or engineering firm to be eligible for award; therefore, provide proof that your firm is permitted by law to practice the professions of architecture or engineering, (i.e.
state registration number, a brief explanation of the firm’s licensing in states that do not register firms, etc.). Failure to submit the required proof could result in a firm’s elimination from consideration. Six hard copies of the SF-330 and six CDs shall be submitted to Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic, Code ACQ21, Attn: Jen McDonald, 6506 Hampton Boulevard, Norfolk, VA 23508. The document should be in a Microsoft file (.doc or .xls format). Responses are due no later than 09 February 2015, 2:00 p.m. local time (EST). Late responses will be handled in accordance with FAR15.208. Hand carried responses will be accepted. Proposals will be submitted in sealed envelopes/boxes marked in the bottom right corner “N62470-14-R-9007 DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM.”
Point of Contact:
Jen McDonald, Contract Specialist