Inactive

N62470-20-R-2005 COST-PLUS-AWARD-FEE (CPAF) INDEFINITE-DELIVERY, INDEFINITE-QUANTITY (IDIQ) SINGLE AWARD CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECT AND ENGINEERING (A-E) ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR COMPREHENSIVE L... N62470-20-R-2005 COST-PLUS-AWARD-FEE (CPAF) INDEFINITE-DELIVERY, INDEFINITE-QUANTITY (IDIQ) SINGLE AWARD CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECT AND ENGINEERING (A-E) ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR COMPREHENSIVE LONG-TERM ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION NAVY (CLEAN) IN NAVFAC ATLANTIC’S AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY (AOR), PRIMARILY IN THE NAVFAC MID-ATLANTIC NORTHEAST AOR, NAVFAC SOUTHEAST AOR, and BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC) EAST AOR. ALL INFORMATION NEEDED FOR INTERESTED PARTIES TO SUBMIT A STANDARD FORM (SF) 330, ARCHITECT ENGINEER QUALIFICATIONS IS CONTAINED HEREIN INCLUDING THE TWO (2) ATTACHMENTS. THERE IS NO SEPARATE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) PACKAGE TO DOWNLOAD. This procurement will result in one Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) 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 Northeast AOR, NAVFAC Southeast AOR, and BRAC East AOR. 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 Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. To a lesser extent, the work will be at other NAVFAC Atlantic and 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 worldwide. These services will be procured in accordance with 40 USC Chapter 11, Selection of Architects and Engineers, as implemented by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6. The resulting contract will be a CPAF IDIQ contract for a base period of one year and four one-year option periods. The ceiling for this procurement is established at $400,000,000. The guaranteed minimum is established at $20,000 for the contract term including option years. 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. 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. There will be no dollar limit per task order and no dollar limit per year. The Government makes no representation as to the number of task orders or the actual amount of work to be ordered. This proposed contract is being solicited on an UNRESTRICTED basis; therefore, replies to this notice are requested from all business concerns. The small business size standard classification is NAICS code 541330, Environmental Engineering Services ($16,500,000). The Government seeks the most highly qualified firm to perform the required services, based on the demonstrated competence and qualifications, in accordance with the selection criteria. Procurement history and the results of market research did not indicate a reasonable expectation of at least three small businesses that possess the required capabilities and capacity to accomplish the work expected under this contract. As a result, a determination was made to solicit this procurement on an unrestricted basis inviting full and open competition. The NAVFAC Atlantic Small Business Office and the Small Business Administration (SBA) Procurement Center Representative (PCR) concur with this decision to synopsize this contract under full and open competition. All firms are advised that registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) database is required prior to submission of an SF-330 package. Failure to register in the SAM database and perform the online Representations and Certifications may render your firm ineligible for award. For more information, check the SAM website: https://www.sam.gov. Registration in Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) @ https://wawf.eb.mil/ is also mandatory prior to award of a contract. The contract requires that the selected firm(s) have on-line access to e-mail via the Internet for routine exchange of correspondence. Firms are advised that the awarded contract will be subject to specific provisions addressing the avoidance of organizational conflicts of interest (OCI). Firms are advised that the following restrictions will apply to the awardee and its affiliates, consultants, and subcontracts under this contract. The prime firm for this contract will be required to perform throughout the contract term. a. If the Contractor under this contract prepares or assists in preparing a statement of work or specifications and plans, the Contractor and its affiliates shall be ineligible to bid or participate, in any capacity, in any contractual effort which is based on such statement of work or specifications and plans as a prime contractor, subcontractor, consultant or in any similar capacity. The Contractor shall not incorporate its products or services in such statement of work or specifications and plans unless identified to as a potential OCI and so directed in writing by the Contracting Officer, in which case the restriction shall not apply. The contractor shall include this clause in its subcontractor or consultant agreements concerning the performance of this contract. b. An organizational conflict of interest may exist if a firm has performed as an Environmental Remedial Action contractor and performs as a Comprehensive Long-Term Environmental Action Navy (CLEAN) contractor at the same installation, site, or location. Some remedial action may be performed by the Architect-Engineer contractor in order to prevent continued contamination which immediately endangers population or property. The Contracting Officer may determine that no organizational conflict of interest exists where the CLEAN contractor performed an environmental study or other incidental services at the site but did not provide a remediation recommendation to the Government. An organizational conflict of interest may also exist on a project basis for firms who have performed as contractors on other environmental engineering contracts. c. If awarded this contract, the contractor shall provide a statement with all bids or proposals which concisely describes all relevant facts concerning any past, present, or currently planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or otherwise) relating to the work to be performed hereunder. The contractor shall warrant that, to the best of the Contractor's knowledge and belief, there are no relevant facts or circumstances which could give rise to an organizational conflict of interest, as defined in FAR Subpart 9.5, or that the Contractor has disclosed all such relevant information prior to all awards. If a potential conflict is discovered after award, the Contractor shall make a full disclosure in writing to the Contracting Officer. The disclosure shall include a description of action which the Contractor proposes to take, after consultation with the Contracting Officer, to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the conflict of interest. d. In addition, if awarded this contract, the Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, of its intention to compete for, or accept the award of any contract for similar or related work for any Department of Defense, other Agency of the federal government, or regulatory agency which may involve sites under the AOR of this contract. Such notification shall be made before the Contractor either competes for or accepts any such contract. e. Remedies: The Government may terminate this contract for convenience, in whole or in part, if it deems such termination necessary to avoid an organizational conflict of interest. If the Contractor was aware of a potential organization conflict of interest prior to award or discovered an actual or potential conflict after award and did not disclose or misrepresented relevant information to the Contracting Officer, the Government may terminate the contract for default, or debar the Contractor from Government contracting, or pursue such other remedies as may be permitted by law or this contract. f. If awarded this contract, the Contractor further agrees to insert in any subcontract or consultant agreement hereunder, provisions which shall conform substantially to the language of this clause, including this paragraph (f). SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Firms shall provide a statement with their SF330 package which describes any known past, present, or currently planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or otherwise) relating to the work to be performed hereunder where a potential OCI as defined in FAR Subpart 9.5 may exist. The statement shall include a description of action which the firm proposes to take to identify, avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the conflict of interest if awarded this contract. In addition, the statement shall provide concurrence that the firm wishing to be considered for this contract shall notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, of its intention to compete for, or accept the award of any contract for similar or related work for any Department of Defense, other Agency of the federal government, or regulatory agency which may involve sites under the AOR of this contract. Such notification shall be made before the Contractor either competes for or accepts any such contract. The statement shall be included as an attachment to the SF330 package submitted. Interviews may be scheduled with firms slated as the most highly qualified. Firms slated for interviews may be asked to clarify information contained in the SF330 submittal. Elaborate presentations are not desired. It is anticipated that interviews for slated firms will be conducted in Norfolk, VA. 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, pilot tests, treatability 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. g. Those in support of evaluating sites impacted with General Radioactive Material (G-RAM). The stages of investigation done for G-RAM sites include (but are not limited to) Historic Site Assessment (HSA), Scoping Survey, Characterization Survey, Remedial Action Support Survey, and Final Status Survey, done in accordance with the most recent update to guidance under the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) and references including but not limited to EPA Handbook on the Management of Munitions Response Actions (Interim Final), May 2005, or latest and Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) S0420-AA-010 (RA2-010) Radiological Affairs Support Program Manual, Jan 2015, or latest edition. h. Those in support of assessments, studies, investigations, sampling methodologies, interim response and remedial action requirements in addressing Emerging Contaminants, including, but not limited to, high visibility Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances. SELECTION CRITERIA A-E firms responding to this synopsis must demonstrate the team’s qualifications with respect to the published selection criteria to perform the required services. Selection Criteria 1-3 are considered most important and are equal among themselves; criteria 4-6 are of slightly lesser importance and are equal among themselves; criterion 7 is of lesser importance still, and criterion 8 is of least importance and will be used as a tiebreaker among technically equal firms. SF330s will be evaluated to determine the most highly qualified firm based on criteria responses. Failure to provide requested data or to comply with the instructions in this notice could result in a firm being considered less qualified or eliminated from consideration. The Selection of Architects and Engineers Statute (40 U.S.C. chapter 11) and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 36.6 selection procedures apply. Specific selection criteria include the following: Criterion 1—Specialized Experience (SF 330, Part I, Section F): Firms will be evaluated on the specialized experience and technical competence of the proposed team in the following: Recent and relevant experience managing and completing multiple, simultaneous environmental projects involving field investigation and preparing studies/analysis/work plans/ remediation oversight for environmental restoration projects and other technical support services. 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). Specialized experience should focus on the following geographic areas: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Experience with, and knowledge of, permits, construction material, and practices in the contracted areas. Innovative cleanup strategies and technologies, and successful attainment of regulatory closure for CERCLA or RCRA sites. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Firms shall provide a maximum of ten (10) projects that best illustrate specialized experience of the proposed team in the areas set forth above. Favorable consideration may be given for projects with more recent work performed within the past 10 years. Favorable consideration may also be given for projects demonstrating Navy and Marine Corps experience, and to a lesser extent other DoD experience. All projects provided in the SF330 must have been performed by the office/branch/ regional office/individual team member actually proposed to manage and/or perform work under this contract. Projects not meeting this requirement will be excluded from evaluation. To enable verification, firms should include the DUNS number along with each firm name in the SF330 Part I, Section F, item 25–“Firms from Section C Involved in this Project,” block 1; include a contract number, task order number, or project identification number in block 21; include an e-mail address and phone number for the point of contact in block 23(c); and include, in the project description, the contract period of performance, award contract value, current contract value, and a summary of the work performed that demonstrates relevance to specialized experience as outlined above. If the firm is a joint venture, submit relevant project experience for the joint venture (if shared experience is available); otherwise, project experience may be submitted for any joint venture partner(s). Joint venture firms are still limited to a maximum of ten projects. If a project was performed by a joint venture, and all joint venture partners on that project are not on the team proposed for this contract, the firm/team should specifically address the work performed by the joint venture partner(s) 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 that entity’s roles and responsibilities on the project, rather than the work performed on the project as a whole. For ID/IQ projects, if the firm/team member only worked on certain task orders, the description should clearly describe the work actually performed by the firm/team member on the specific task orders and that entity’s roles and responsibilities on the task orders. Projects are not required from each member of a joint venture; however, joint ventures offering relevant experience from all members may be considered more favorably. If the project description does not clearly delineate the work performed by the entity/entities offering/teaming on this contract, the project could be eliminated from consideration. For submittal purposes, a single task order on an IDIQ contract, an entire IDIQ contract, or a standalone contract can be considered a project. Examples of work submitted that do not meet the definition of a project will not be evaluated. Failure to provide all requested data, accessible points of contact or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified or eliminated from consideration. All information for Criterion 1 should be submitted in Part I, Section F of the SF330. Introductions shall not be included for Section F. The Government will not consider information submitted in addition to Part I, Section F in evaluating Criterion 1. Criterion 2—Professional Qualifications (SF330 Part I, Sections E, G and H): Firms will be evaluated on the professional qualifications, competence, and related experience of the key personnel to accomplish the work proposed under this contract as well as the depth of professional staff the team possesses, including participation in example projects. Key personnel are individuals who will have major contract or project management responsibilities and/or will provide unusual or unique expertise. Failure to provide a balanced workforce in the disciplines required to satisfy the requirements of the scope listed above will result in the firm being considered not qualified. Specific disciplines that must be included in key personnel are Program Management staff; quality control/quality assurance; safety management, major task order or project managers; firms should also include in key personnel any others that will play a major role in this contract. Key Personnel should demonstrate the following: Recent experience in environmental technical disciplines, program management, project management, restoration projects or other technical support services. Specifically describe experience pertaining to CERCLA, RCRA, MRP and radiological investigations and experience in the role the personnel will fill for this contract. Recent experience interfacing with regulatory agencies (federal/state/local), with emphasis on regulatory agency interfacing for projects in Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin. Experience and expertise in partnering/teambuilding skills with regulatory and similar agencies. The firm should also demonstrate its depth of professional staff by discussing/identifying the number of task order level project managers and senior level managers as well as active professional engineering registration(s) as well as other relevant registration(s) and/or the ability to obtain registration(s) among professional staff (including but not limited to identified key personnel) in Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Résumés are limited to one page each and should cite project specific experience and timeframe; indicate proposed role in this contract; and provide information on professional registration, certification, licensure and/or accreditation. Indicate participation of key personnel in example projects in the SF330 Part I, Section G. Introductions shall not be included in Section E. Section H can be used for depth of professional staff. Criterion 3—Past Performance (SF 330 Part I, Section H): Firms will be evaluated based on past performance in terms of work quality, compliance with schedules, cost control, and stakeholder/customer satisfaction with an emphasis on example projects presented in Criterion 1 (see submission requirements below). The Government may also utilize information obtained via customer inquiries, information in Government databases, and other information available to the Government including but not limited to contact with points of contact identified in other criteria. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Firms shall submit all completed CPARS/ACASS evaluations, including all interim evaluations, for each example project listed under Criterion 1. CPARS/ACASS evaluations shall be submitted in PDF format. If there is not a completed CPARS/ACASS evaluation, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in this notice (Attachment A) is provided for the firm or its team members to submit to the client for each project the firm includes under Criterion 1 – Specialized Experience. A firm shall not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS/ACASS is available. If a CPARS/ACASS evaluation is not available, ensure correct phone numbers and e-mail addresses are provided for the client technical point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with the firm’s SF330. If the firm is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the response date set forth in this notice, the firm should complete and submit with its response the first page of the PPQ providing contract and client information for the respective project(s). Also, firms may submit PPQs previously submitted under a different RFP (legible copies are acceptable) as long as it is on the same form as posted with this synopsis. Firms should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Atlantic, Code ACQ21, Attn: Charlotte Ange via email at charlotte.ange@navy.mil, prior to the response date. Firms shall not incorporate by reference into their response PPQs or CPARS previously submitted in response to other A-E services procurements. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Firms shall submit copies of all award fee determinations pertaining to the projects provided under Criterion 1. Criterion 4—Safety (SF330 Part I, Section H): Firms will be evaluated on their Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Days Away, Restricted, or Transferred (DART) rates, OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) and the firm’s Technical Approach for Safety. The Government is seeking to determine that the firm has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors and any innovative safety methods that the firm plans to implement for this procurement. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the firm. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Submit the following information: The firm shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, 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. DART and TRC Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.) (1) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART): Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data (2017, 2018, and 2019). If a firm cannot submit an OSHA DART rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission. (2) OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data (2017, 2018, and 2019). If a firm cannot submit an OSHA TRC rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission (3) Technical Approach for Safety: The firm shall submit a narrative describing their plan for safety. The narrative should include the firm’s plan that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. The narrative should fully describe the safety management system the firm will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self- performed and subcontractor performed work. The firm will describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels. Additionally, the contactor will describe their methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to two pages. Criterion 5—Program Management and Capacity (SF330 Part I, Section H): Firms will be evaluated on the ability to concurrently perform and manage multiple complex projects in different locations to meet aggressive schedules and control direct and indirect costs (approximately 200 task orders simultaneously). The evaluation will include consideration of the firm’s proposed organizational structure and how it is advantageous to the Government, the ability to coordinate and work effectively with other contractors involved in NAVFAC Atlantic’s environmental programs, the ability to expeditiously submit technical and cost proposals, negotiate and commence work in a timely/efficient manner, and the location of their proposed program management office (PMO) and other key staff members and how the location is advantageous to the Government. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Describe the firm’s ability to concurrently perform and manage multiple projects in different locations to meet aggressive schedules and control direct and indirect costs. For this factor, details should be provided on: The firm’s ability to expeditiously submit technical and cost proposals for a cost contract, demonstrating an understanding of the nuances of negotiating cost contracts. The firm’s ability to coordinate and work effectively with other contractors working on other NAVFAC contracts. The firm’s present workload and the project team’s availability for the specified contract performance period. The organizational structure, PMO location, and location of key personnel. The assignment of responsibilities among corporate team and subcontractor members. The past working experience and relationships among team members, including joint venture members if applicable. Firms with established working relationships with the proposed team members and/or joint venture partners for similar work may be considered more favorably. Firms should also identify any innovations the firm can offer relevant to management of the contract, such as the innovative use of information management systems and how the firm used them to improve quality and generate efficiencies in the management of past projects. Criterion 6—Quality Control (SF330 Part I, Section H): Firms will be evaluated on the strength of the quality control (QC) plan proposed by the firm to ensure quality products under this contract. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Discuss how the quality control plan will enable the firm to provide overall technical review and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) for all field work and deliverables required under this contract. Provide an example of how the plan has worked for one of the projects submitted as part of Criterion 1or describe how the plan will work if it has not been used previously. Additionally, discuss any QA/QC lessons learned that have led to the proposed plan. Provide an organizational chart showing the inter-relationship of management and team components. Identify the quality control manager and define responsibilities and authorities assigned to that individual. Discuss how the firm’s quality control plan extends to the subcontractors (including laboratories and drillers) and, in particular, how the prime would satisfy QA/QC requirements on work completed by a subcontractor. Criterion 7 – Commitment to Small Business (SF330, Part I Section H): Firms will be evaluated in terms of their extent to they have identifie...