C -- MISCELLANEOUS HAZARDOUS, TOXIC, RADIOLOGICAL WASTE DESIGNS AND INVESTIGATIONS IN WA, OR, ID AND MT

Notice Date

November 2, 2000

Contracting Office

US Army, Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, PO Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98124-3755

ZIP Code

98124-3755

Solicitation Number

DACA67-01-R-0205

Response Due

December 1, 2000

Point of Contact

Sharon Gonzalez, 206-764-3635

E-Mail Address

Sharon Gonzalez, Contract Specialist (Sharon.J.Gonzalez@usace.army.mil)

Description

This paragraph including project description and evaluation criterion are revised to read as reflected herein. Provide multi-discipline Architect-Engineer (A-E) design services for Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana and various miscellaneous locations outside of the Northwest. Services will be required for, but not limited to, pollution prevention and waste minimization studies, plans and designs, military facility designs for wastewater and waste handling, fueling system designs, Hazardous Toxic and Radioactive Waste (HTRW) remedial action and corrective action designs, HTRW (remedial) assessments/investigations/feasibility studies (site investigation), pilot tests, HTRW management plans, risk assessments, tank management plans, permit applications and studies; treatability studies; site specific resource field examinations; field sampling, installation of monitoring wells/borings in conjunction with Preliminary Assessments (PA), Site Investigations (SI), Remedial Investigations (RI), Feasibility Studies (FS), Remedial Designs (RD), and Long Term Monitoring (LTM) and correctives action studies under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) counterpart activities, i.e.,, chemical analysis, monitoring, data analysis and interpretation; low level radioactive waste and mixed waste investigation and remediation design, asbestos, lead based paint and radon investigations and abatement designs and other related pollution and HTRW designs, investigations, assessments, studies and surveys, natural and cultural resource investigations and reports (including NEPA documents), mitigation plans and designs, habitat restoration studies, plans and designs. EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR A-E SELECTION Significant evaluation criteria in descending order of importance are: 1. Specialized experience and technical competence of the firm in types of work required, including a. Remedial designs and corrective action designs. Primarily designs associated with remedial actions for soil and groundwater contamination, fueling systems, and replacement systems for underground fuel storage tanks system removals; b. Fieldwork, data collection and interpretation, evaluation and modeling capability; c. Experience conducting HTRW investigations and preparing remedial designs for various sites; d. Working knowledge of and experience with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; Super-Fund Amendments and Reauthorization Act; Clean Water Act; Toxic Substance Control Act; and other related federal laws, regulations and programs, and equivalent state and local requirements for the States of Washington, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and other areas outside of the Pacific Northwest; programs such as Underground Storage Tank regulations, Washington's Model Toxics Control Act, etc.; e. Low level radioactive waste and mixed waste investigation and remediation design; f. Habitat restoration studies, plans, and designs; and, g. Mitigation plans and designs. 2. Professional qualifications of firm's staff and consultants to be assigned to this project, which are necessary for satisfactory performance of required services; 3. Past performance on Department of Defense (DOD) and other contracts with respect to cost control, quality of work, and compliance with performance schedules; 4. Capacity of the firm to accomplish the work in the required time, including whether the firm is currently under contract with the Seattle District; 5. Location of the firm in the general geographic area of the project. NOTE: This criterion is considered a secondary factor and will only be evaluated for firms that make the short-list. 6. Extent of participation of Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), historically black Colleges and universities, and minority institutions in the proposed contract team, measured as a percentage of estimated effort. NOTE: This criterion is considered a secondary factor and will only be evaluated for firms that make the short-list. 7. Volume of DOD contract awards to the prime A-E firm in the last 12 months. NOTE: This criterion is considered a secondary factor and will only be evaluated for firms that make the short-list. Construction support services may be included as an option. A-E with be required to use M-CACES for cost estimating on this contract. The software will be furnished by the Corps of Engineers after contract award. Responding firms should indicate ability to access an electronic bulletin board and automated review management system (DrChecks) via modem. The Government intends to award 2 contracts for this requirement; 1 Unrestricted and 1 set aside for a Small Business Concern. Each contract will include a Base Year and Two Option Periods. Maximum value of all work awarded under each contract will be limited to $2 million per year or $6 million over the life of the contracts; delivery orders of NTE $2,000,000 each to be issued as requirements arise. Qualified firms desiring consideration shall submit one copy of SF 255, including organizational chart of key personnel to be assigned to this project, current SF 254, and consultant's current SF 254's. No additional contract information will be given to A-E firms. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code is 541330 and the Standard Industrial Classification Code is 8711 with size standard of $4.0 million. It is antisipated that the selected firm will be required to submit a subcontracting plan with its fee proposal, if it is a large business. The plan must be consistent with Section 806(b) of PL 100-180, PL 95-507 and PL 99-661. If a large firm chooses to subcontract, it is recommended that 50 percent of the total planned subcontracting dollars should be placed with Small Business (SB) concerns, 8 percent with Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB), or historically black colleges and universities of minority institutions, and 5 percent to women-owned businesses (WOSB). WOSB's may not qualify as SDBs for federal contracts. CITE: (I-064 SN038780)*

Web Link

Seattle District, Corps of Engineers, Contracting Page (http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/ct/)

Record

Loren Data Corp. 20001106/CSOL001.HTM (W-307 SN505847)