Commander, Pacific Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Makalapa, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, 96860-7300

Z -- FIXED PRICE REMEDIAL ACTION CONTRACT FOR VARIOUS SITES IN HAWAII SOL N62742-96-R-1314 DUE 030397 POC Contact Ms. Norine Horikawa, Contract Specialist, Code 0232NH, (808) 474-5136, /Mr. Danny Lau, Contracting Officer, Code 0232DL, (808) 471-4188 The primary scope of work will encompass, but not be limited to, UST closure and installation in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 265 Subpart J -- Tank Systems, 40 CFR 270.11d, 40 CFR 280, HAR 11-265-192, and HAR 11-270-1160; and management, transportation, and disposal of contaminated media. The contaminants to be addressed will include, but not limited to, those identified and regulated under RCRA, CERCLA, TSCA, and petroleum oils and lubricants. High level radioactive materials, Nuclear Biological & Chemical (NBC) warfare, and agents will not be included. The contaminants included are predominantly solvents, petroleum oil lubricants (POL), metals, acids, bases, reactives, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), pesticides, and low level radiological materials. These contaminants may be present in soils, sediments, groundwater, sludge, surface water, and man-made structures. The contaminated sites may be landfills, hazardous waste storage and disposal facilities, tanks, lagoons, fire fighting training areas, or other facilities. This procurement is 100% set-aside for SMALL BUSINESS concerns. The SIC is 8744, 500 employees. The Government intends to make multiple awards from the responses to this solicitation, however, a single award may be made. The resultant contract(s) will be a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery/Quantity (ID/IQ) type contract. Award of the contract is subject to the availability of funds, the contract terms will be a base period of one year with two one-year option periods. Initial award will be for the base period only. The estimated total value for the base and two option periods is $15,000,000 (for informational purposes only, the estimated amount per year is $5,000,000). Source selection procedures will be used and award is to be based on the proposal determined to be the best value to the Government, considering both cost and technical merit. The Request for Proposal (RFP) will be available on or about January 15, 1997 in limited quantities and will be available only until supplies are exhausted. Interested parties should request promptly, in writing (fax requests are accepted, fax no. (808) 474-1146), with names, addresses (no P.O. boxes), area code, and phone and fax number. Mail requests to Pacific Division (Code 0232NH), Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Environmental Office Complex, Makalapa Drive, Pearl Harbor, HI 96860-7300. All interested parties who responded to the Presolicitation/Sources Sought Notice published on September 06, 1996, need not submit another request for the RFP, however, if you are no longer interested in this procurement, a notice faxed to this office is requested. A preproposal conference is scheduled for January 30, 1997 at 9:00 a.m HST. It is requested that questions concerning the RFP be faxed to (808) 474-1146, Attn: N. Horikawa, on or before January 28, 1997. All questions must be in writing, no oral questions will be addressed at this preproposal conference, however, an overview of the solicitation will be given. Specify the section and paragraph of the solicitation for which clarification is requested. The proposals are to be submitted on the date specified on the SF33, in two separate packages, technical and cost. A portion of the technical proposal will be orally presented. In order to effect efficient competition, an evaluation will be conducted of the written technical factors excluding the information contained in Appendix E and a down-select may be performed to limit the number of offerors who will make oral presentations. The Contracting Officer will then select by lottery, the order for the oral presentations. Past performance information may also be obtained from other sources known to the Government. The following technical evaluation factors, listed in relative order of importance, shall be used to evaluate the technical aspects of each proposal. Factors which are to be presented orally are as indicated. FACTOR A. Technical Understanding: Subfactors 1. and 2. are of equal importance. Subfactors 4.and 5. are of equal importance. Subfactors 1. and 2. are of more importance than subfactor 3. which is more important than subfactors 4. and 5. 1.) Describe your methods/work procedures which are necessary, adequate, and effective to accomplish the required contract work as stated in Section C. 2.) Demonstrate your level of understanding and feasibility of the proposed approach to accomplish the work specified in the sample project. 3.) (Oral) Describe the use of innovative methods, techniques, equipment, and technologies to reduce costs. Provide examples of successfully completed projects in which innovative methods, techniques, equipment and technologies were used and the cost savings realized. 4.) (Oral) Demonstrate that the provisions for environmental protection and pollution control are adequate environmental protection measures and are in accordance with environmental regulations. 5.) Describe your methods used when developing work plans, cost estimates, and schedules which are detailed adequately to reflect a sound approach to costing and accomplishing the work. FACTOR B. Experience, Management and Past Performance: Subfactors are listed in descending order of importance. 1.) Describe your experience and quality of performance in UST closures/installation and the remediation of contaminated sites of similar type and dollar value completed within the past 5 years (minimum 5 years experience required). 2.) (Oral) Describe your emergency response procedures to allow for response within a short time frame and detail how these procedures are in compliance with environmental regulations. 3.) Describe how your Health and Safety Plan meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.120 and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers EM-385-1-1, Safety and Health Requirements Manual. Demonstrate that the plan's enforcement procedures and procedures for development of site specific health and safety plans are adequate. 4.) (Oral) Provide an organizational chart which reflects a logical flow of authority and responsibility and which reflects that spans of control are not excessive. 5.) Provide your plan to implement and comply with DFARS Clause 252.222-7000, Restrictions on Employment of Personnel (DEC 1991) which is included in Section I of the RFP. FACTOR C. Qualifications of project team members: Subfactors are listed in descending order of importance. 1.) Submit resumes of all key management personnel which demonstrates that the personnel have adequate and efficient performance backgrounds (minimum 5 years experience). 2.) (Oral) Demonstrate that adequate resources are available to support the project team organization. 3.) Describe the quality control procedures to be implemented in the performance of this contract and demonstrate that they are adequate to ensure quality and efficient performance. TECHNICAL EVALUATION TECHNIQUES: In accordance with the relative importance of the Technical Evaluation Factors, the TEP will: a.) Establish compliance with the minimum technical requirements set forth in the RFP.If an item of work does not comply with the minimum criteria, it shall be identified as nonconforming. If information is insufficient to establish compliance, it will also be noted. b.) Assign minimal ratings for compliance with minimal criteria. c.) Acknowledge and identify items that exceed the minimum criteria and describe their strengths and/or weaknesses. PRICE/COST EVALUATION. In analyzing cost under this solicitation, the realism of the proposed costs will be considered. As used herein, the term "cost realism" pertains to the proposer's ability to project costs which can be reasonably expected to be incurred in the performance of a resulting contract. Moreover, proposed costs are to be in accordance with an offeror's technical proposal which would reasonably indicate that the offeror understands the nature and scope of the services to be performed. Proposed costs may be adjusted, for purposes of evaluation, based upon the results of a cost realism evaluation, which at a minimum will include an analysis of all the elements detailed in the provision entitled "Submission of Proposals." Congruence between the technical and cost proposals shall also be utilized to determine the realism of proposed costs, therefore, technical proposals may be downgraded if the costs proposed are not in sufficient detail to allow for a comprehensive analysis. (0001)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0126 19970106\Z-0004.SOL)