P--CA-STONE LAKES NWR ABATEMENT & DEMO

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Contracting and General Services (CGS) Region 1 has a requirement to procure a firm fixed price order for hazardous materials abatement and complete demolition and removal of the Clubhouse located at Stone Lakes NWR ¿ Elk Grove, CA. Project is set-aside to small businesses. Applicable NAICS code is 238910. Small business size is defined as $15.0 million or less annually when averaged over a three year period. Period of performance is 60 calendar days. Due to a conflict with the waterfowl hunting program, the 60 calendar day period for commencement of work can not start until March 1, 2020. Site Visit: Firms interested in attending a site visit will meet at Stone Lakes National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), 1624 Hood-Franklin Road, Elk Grove, CA 95757-9774 on Thursday, August 8, 2019 at 9 AM local time. If planning on attending this site visit, please contact Karl Lautzenheiser at

href="mailto:karl_lautzenheiser@fws.gov">karl_lautzenheiser@fws.gov at least a couple days prior to the site visit. Date for submission of Questions: The cut off date for questions has already expired. Background: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) owns and operates the Stone Lakes NWR located in Elk Grove, CA, which is approximately 15 miles south of Sacramento, CA. Last year, the Refuge contracted for environmental services to conduct an asbestos materials assessment survey. The survey documents were received from the consultant in March, 2019. The asbestos containing materials survey was performed in preparation for future abatement and structure demolition activities. The Clubhouse is a single-story vacant wood-framed residential structure. The structure¿s footprint is approximately 30-feet by 40-feet. The following is an overview of the required tasks: Task 1 - Hazardous Materials Abatement at Clubhouse 1.1 Prior to commencement of work, contractor shall furnish a Hazardous Materials Abatement Plan to the Technical Coordinator for review and approval. The plan shall include the following sections and be signed by a Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH): - Materials and Equipment; - Compliance Program for Worker Protection; - Containment System; - Emissions Monitoring; - Waste Characterization, Handling and Disposal; and - Employee Certifications. 1.2 Contractor responsible for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) analysis and proper disposal of all materials found to exceed TCLP D-list maximum contamination levels (MCLs), as specified by the EPA. Contractor shall remove and properly dispose of all asbestos containing materials (ACM), asbestos containing construction materials (ACCM), regulated asbestos containing materials (RACM), as indicated in the attached Hazardous Materials Assessment Survey, dated March 11, 2019. 1.3 Contractor shall prepare and submit air sampling reports and waste manifest reports. a. Air Sampling Reports: Indicate hazardous contaminate concentration results and show contaminates are at or below regulatory limits. b. Waste Manifest Reports: Include enough detail to track hazardous waste from the time it left the worksite until it reaches the offsite disposal facility. Provide written evidence that the offsite disposal facility to be used is approved for hazardous waste disposal by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), State and local regulatory agencies. 1.4 Contractor shall submit all reports as required in ¿Deliverables¿ section 7.2 of SOW. Report shall summarize the information the daily reports, air sampling reports and waste manifest reports. Report shall confirm all locations listed at the club house have been properly abated. Report shall also confirm that hazardous materials have been disposed. Task 2 - Demolition / Removal 2.1 Upon successful completion of Task 1, contractor shall demolish and remove all materials from the site including Clubhouse and chain link dog kennel. 2.2 Contractor shall prepare and submit waste manifest reports. Waste manifest reports shall include the percentage of diversion of materials from landfills. Basis for Award: The "Lowest-Priced, Technically-Acceptable (LPTA)" Source Selection Process shall be utilized in accordance with (IAW) FAR Part 15.101-2 as the basis for award. The lowest priced proposal will be based upon the combined total cost for all bid items. Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of an offer meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. There will be two (2) non-cost evaluation factors: Proof of certification in California to perform lead based abatement services and Recent Relevant Past Performance. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than `Acceptable¿ must be achieved each of these no-cost evaluation factors. The Government will first conduct a price analysis to determine fairness, reasonableness and if unbalanced pricing exists. Offerors proposals will then be ranked from the lowest to the highest-priced. The Government will then evaluate the technical proposal of the apparent, lowest-priced offeror. If the apparent, lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal is "Unacceptable" the Government will then evaluate the technical proposal of the apparent, second lowest-priced offeror. This process will continue until a lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal is "Acceptable." Once the Government identifies the lowest-priced, technically-acceptable offeror, an award will be made and no other proposals will be evaluated from offerors who proposed higher pricing. B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED The following evaluation factors and will be used to evaluate each proposal: FACTOR 1 - CERTIFICATION IN CA FOR LEAD BASED PAINT ABATEMENT SERVICES FACTOR 2 - RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR 3 - PRICE Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. Evaluation of the offeror's proposal shall address each factor as it applies to the statement of work, specifications and drawings. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in paragraph c below (Evaluation Approach) below. An offer will receive an `Acceptable¿ rating if it meets the minimum requirements of all evaluation factors described below. C. EVALUATION APPROACH FACTOR 1 - CERTIFICATION IN CA FOR LEAD BASED PAINT ABATEMENT SERVICES Offerors shall be evaluated to determine whether they are currently certified in California to perform lead based paint abatement services. Offerors shall provide proof of this certification with their offer. FACTOR 1 RECENT RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Rating Description Acceptable Quote clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor. Unacceptable Quote does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor. FACTOR 2 - RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE Offeror's past performance shall be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment. Offerors shall provide at least one (1) recent hazardous material abatement and demo project for similar work. Project shall include current points of contact and phone numbers. The contractor is solely responsible for the accuracy of this information as the Government will not pursue incorrect contact data. For a project to be considered, the project shall have been similar in nature to the scope for work for this project, shall of had a current or final contract value greater than $10,000.00 and had been completed within the past five past five (5) years or be currently ongoing (but at least 25% complete). Project does not have to have been with a Federal Agency to be considered. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE / Unique Entity Identifiers (i.e. DUNS) of team members (i.e. partnerships, joint ventures, teaming arrangements or parent companies / subsidiaries / affiliates) identified in the offeror¿s proposals, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror. FACTOR 2 RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATINGS DEFINITION Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror¿s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror¿s performance record is unknown. (See note below.) Unacceptable Based on the offeror¿s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance IAW FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv); therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of `Acceptable¿ / `Unacceptable,¿ unknown past performance shall be considered `Acceptable.¿ FACTOR 3 - PRICE Price - The basis for determining lowest price will be the combined total value of all tasks on the bid schedule. The combined total of all tasks will also be assessed to determine the overall Price Fair and Reasonable. If any of the tasks appear to be unbalanced, a review of the breakdown of each task will be conducted. Offeror's prices for each item within the bid schedule shall represent the best price in response to the solicitation. Prices will be evaluated using price analysis IAW FAR 15.404-1(a)(2) and 15.404-1(b). Prices shall be evaluated to determine fairness, reasonableness and if unbalanced pricing exists. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated. If price analysis techniques indicate that a proposal is unbalanced, the contracting officer shall consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government (no page limit). Solicitation Number 140F0119Q0177 with attachments is being posted on or about July 31, 2019 with quotes due by 2 PM PT on August 27, 2019. If submitted by mail channels, the quote must be received by no later that date/time or it can be emailed directly to Karl_Lautzenheiser@fws.gov. No further notice will be posted on FedBizOpps. To be considered for award, interested contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database when submitting a quote at (https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/) and Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) must be completed at this same website. For technical or contract questions, please contact Karl Lautzenheiser by email to Karl_Lautzenheiser@fws.gov.