Architect and Engineering Services for Production Technical Services (PTS) for FEMA's Risk MAP Program

Notice Type: Presolicitation Notice

Posted Date: 15-MAR-21

Office Address: Homeland Security, Department of; FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY; MITIGATION SECTION(MIT60); WASHINGTON, DC 20472

Subject: Architect and Engineering Services for Production Technical Services (PTS) for FEMA's Risk MAP Program

Classification Code: C - Architect and engineering services

Solicitation Number: HSFE60-21-S-0001

Contact: Randall Christner

Place of Performance Country: USA

Description: Homeland Security, Department of

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

MITIGATION SECTION(MIT60)

1. Overview: This Synopsis is being publicized on beta.sam.gov in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.601-1. The requirement, entitled Production and Technical Services (PTS), is being competed on a full and open basis. The Product Service Code (PSC) is C219, Other Architect and Engineering Services and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is 541330, Engineering Services. This procurement is not set-aside for small business concerns. This procurement is for architect and engineering (A&E) services and the selection of the most qualified firm(s) will be conducted in accordance with the Selection of Architects and Engineers statute as implemented in FAR Subpart 36.6 and HSAR Subchapter 3036.6. Responsible A&E firms, also referred to as Offerors, meeting the requirements described in this announcement are invited to submit: (1) a Standard Form (SF) 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications, Parts I and II and (2) supplemental data described below to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for consideration. FEMA intends to issue three (3) single award Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contracts for three geographic zones. FEMA intends to award one contract to the most qualified, responsible Offeror for each zone with fair and reasonable cost/pricing. Each contract award will include a 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods with an IDIQ contract maximum amount of $300 million and a minimum of $10,000 (inclusive of all option periods). Each zone is comprised of multiple FEMA Regions as stated herein. When combined the zones cover the United States and its territories. The zones were developed based on the unique needs and challenges of the FEMA Regions within each zone. Full and open competition will be used for this requirement in combination with a partial small business set-aside for Letter of Map Revision/MT-2 support which will be procured under a stand-alone solicitation. This MT-2 support is currently provided by the incumbent PTS contractors and will be transitioned to the successful small business concern for this work. 2. Issuing Office: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Office of Chief Procurement Officer 500 C. Street, SW, 3rd Floor Washington, DC 20472 3. Description of Services: The purpose of this acquisition is to procure PTS services to support FEMA/Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration's (FIMA) Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) program. FIMA requires Contractor provided A&E services to generate and evaluate flood hazard and risk information and support for the development and implementation of mitigation, planning, flood mapping and modeling activities. FIMA's Risk Management Directorate (RMD) has operated the Risk MAP program since 2009. Through collaboration with federal, state, local, and tribal stakeholders, Risk MAP delivers quality data to increase public awareness and leads to actions that reduce risk to life and property. Risk MAP is closely aligned with FEMA Strategic Goal 1.1, "Incentivize investments that reduce risk, including pre-disaster mitigation, and reduce disaster costs at all levels." The flood mapping and modeling activities provided by the PTS Contractors are the basis for FEMA/National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP) floodplain management regulations and flood insurance requirements. The NFIP maintains and updates flood hazard information through flood insurance rate maps and risk assessments for the United States and its territories under the PTS contracts. Virtual Library A virtual library containing relevant Risk MAP program documents is available to all interested vendors. To obtain access rights to the library interested vendors shall send an email request to the Government points of contact set forth in Section 4 of this synopsis. The request must include vendor name, vendor's DUNS number, and names of individuals who will access the library. The request must include a completed and signed non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for each individual who will access the library. The NDA is provided as Attachment 1 to this synopsis. The three zones applicable to this synopsis are defined as follows: Zone-1: Covers geographic areas primarily affected by north Atlantic storm events, severe winter storms, and coastal storm surge. These events affect flood mapping and the flood plain development for this zone. Zone-2: Covers geographic areas primarily affected by the south Atlantic storm events. This zone has the highest risk of hurricanes. This zone is affected by storm surge caused by the hurricanes and tends to require a high amount of flood disaster support. These events affect flood mapping and the flood plain development for this zone. Zone-3: Covers geographic areas primarily affected by seismic activity, flash flooding, erosion and landslides, and wildfires. This zone experiences more levee work and alluvial fan flooding (defined as flooding occurring on the surface of an alluvial fan, which originates at the apex and is characterized by high-velocity flows; active processes of erosion, sediment transport, and deposition; and unpredictable flow paths). These events affect flood mapping and the flood plain development for this zone. The three (3) zones are mapped below according to FEMA regions. Zone 1 '-' Region I: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont '-' Region II: New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands '-' Region III: District of Columbia, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia '-' Region V: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin '-' FEMA/HQ, Washington DC, Project management and integration of the mapping projects, hazard mitigation, disaster support for Zone-1. Zone 2 '-' Region IV: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee '-' Region VI: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas '-' Region VII: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska '-' FEMA/HQ, Washington DC, Project management and integration of the mapping projects, hazard mitigation, disaster support for Zone-2. Zone 3 '-' Region VIII: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming '-' Region IX: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Pacific Islands '-' Region X: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington '-' FEMA/HQ, Washington DC, Project management and integration of the mapping projects, hazard mitigation, disaster support of Zone-3. a. Place of Performance: The potential place of performance includes the entire geographic area of each zone applicable to each contract award. b. Scope of Services: The PTS scope of work includes A&E services for the National and Regional flood mapping project portfolio which incorporates the following: discovery activities, base level engineering, light detection and rating collection, field surveys, coastal erosion mapping, coastal surge analysis, coastal overland analysis, coastal outreach, levee analyses, levee floodplain mapping, local levee partnership team outreach, hydrologic and hydraulic analysis, re-delineation, floodplain mapping, and flood-risk products. The deliverables provided under the PTS Contracts include but are not limited to statistical information and data for river flow, storm tides, hydrologic/hydraulic analyses, rainfall, and topographic surveys. See the IDIQ contract performance work statement (PWS) provided as Attachment 2 of this synopsis for a complete description of the scope of work to be provided. Please note the attached PWS applies to all three zones. c. Cost Range and Limitations: The total maximum amount of each of the three IDIQ contracts will be $300,000,000. The guaranteed minimum amount of work is $10,000 (these amounts are inclusive of all option periods). The guaranteed minimum is expected to be satisfied through the placement of the Task Order 0001 expected to be issued concurrently with contract award. d. Contract Type: Each IDIQ contract will permit the issuance of Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) task orders or a hybrid of both contract types. e. Period of Performance: The period of performance for each IDIQ contract will consist of a 12-month base period from the date of award followed by four 12-month option periods. 4. Submission of Vendor Questions: All questions pertaining to this synopsis are due no later than March 8, 2021 at 2:00PM (local time) of the Issuing Office. All questions and communications regarding this solicitation must be received via email to the Procuring Contracting Officer, Mark Blevins at [email protected], the Contract Specialist, Randall Christner at [email protected] and Margie Cox Marvel at [email protected]. No phone calls will be accepted. The Government will post all vendor questions and answers on beta.sam.gov. The Government reserves the right to answer any late questions. 5. Submission of Phase-1 Proposals SF-330s and other Qualification Data: Phase-1 submissions are due by April 5, 2021 at 10:00AM (local time of the issuing office). All submissions in response to this synopsis must be submitted via email to the Procuring Contracting Officer, Mark Blevins at [email protected], the Contract Specialist, Randall Christner at [email protected] and Margie Cox Marvel at [email protected]. Please note, electronic files shall not exceed 10MB or they will be rejected by the FEMA server. As necessary, files shall be submitted in parts in order to stay within the 10MB limit. Failure to follow the instructions as noted herein could result in the untimely receipt by the Government of an Offeror's submission. Untimely receipt of any required submission shall preclude that submission from being considered. In other words, untimely submissions will not be reviewed or otherwise evaluated by the Government. It is the Offeror's duty to ensure it complies with instructions as noted herein, to include being timely. 6. Instructions for Submission Preparation: Offerors shall submit the following to be considered for award. Separate, and stand-alone SF-330's and other qualifications must be submitted for each zone the Offeror is competing. * Written Standard Form (SF) 330 Part I -- Contract-Specific Qualifications * Written Standard Form (SF) 330 Part II -- General Qualifications * Response to the Technical Scenarios * Proposed Task Order 0001 Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) The SF-330 and supporting information must include: (1) the company name and DUNS number for all team members including the prime Offeror, Joint Venture (JV) members and proposed subcontractor, (2) synopsis number, and (3) applicable zone in which the Offeror is competing. Offerors may submit SF-330s for any combination of zones. Please note that Offerors are precluded from serving as a Joint Venture (JV) member for more than one JV proposing for one zone or any combination of the three zones. In other words, Offerors may only serve as a member of one JV in response to this synopsis. Offerors, including JVs, may compete for more than one zone. Subcontractors may be proposed by multiple prime Offerors for all three zones. 7. Phase-1 SF-330 Instructions: Offerors shall submit a SF-330s and other qualifications in response to the five (5) standard selection criteria listed in FAR 36.602-1, as well as two (2) additional evaluation criteria (reference FAR 35.602-1(a)(6)), which Offerors are required to address under Section H of the SF-330. The SF-330 can be found at https://www.gsa.gov/forms-library/architect-engineer-qualifications. A separate, stand-alone SF-330 shall be submitted for each zone the Offeror is competing. The total page limit for all parts of the SF-330 and other qualifications shall not exceed fifty (50) single-sided pages. The proposed PWS and QASP for task order 0001 do not count towards the page limit. In addition a cover page and table of contents shall be included for up to 2-additonal pages do not count towards the page limit. All pages (including written, project photographs, sketches, drawings, and additional information) submitted in addition to the SF-330 shall be 8.5 by 11 inch and shall use a type pitch that is no smaller than a standard 11-point font type, with the exception of charts, graphs, or tables, which shall use a pitch not smaller than 10-point font. Each page shall have not less than one-inch margins on each side of the page. Header/footer information (which does not include any information to be evaluated) may be included in the 1" margin space. Each 8.5 inch by 11 inch "page" shall count as one page. Pages shall be numbered. Only Calibri or Times New Roman fonts may be used. All other material such as brochures or samples of work, attachments, or extra pages will not be considered. In addition to the specific instructions on the SF-330, Offerors shall adhere to the following requirements: SF-330 Part I Section A. Contract Information. For the title and location, the Offeror shall reference synopsis number and the applicable zone the Offeror is proposing. Offerors are reminded that a separate SF-330 is required for each zone they are competing. SF-330 Part I Section B. Architect-Engineer Point of contact. The Offeror shall insure the point of contact is available to respond to emails or phone calls 7-days a week including Saturday and Sunday between the hours of 7:00AM and 7:00PM (local time of the Issuing Office). All emails and phone-calls must be promptly returned within 2-hours of receipt unless a longer response period is provided. SF-330 Part I Section C. Proposed Team. The Offeror shall include the DUNS number and legal company name for the prime Offeror, each JV Member (if applicable), and all proposed subcontractors. Signed letters of commitment are required for proposed subcontractors and key personnel. No consideration will be given to any proposed team member that fails to provide this information and/or the required signed letters of commitment. No consideration will be given to parent companies and subsidiaries unless the parent company and/or subsidiary is proposed as a team member that will have substantial involvement in the work to be provided. SF-330 Part I Section D. Organizational Chart of Proposed Team. No supplemental instruction applies to this section. SF-330 Part I Section E. Resumes of Personnel Proposed for this Contract. The proposed Key Personnel shall meet or exceed the minimum qualifications set forth in the PWS provided as Attachment-1. Only proposed Key Personnel with a signed letter of commitment will be considered. The Offeror may provide up to five (5) projects in which the person had a significant role that demonstrates the person's capability relevant to her/his proposed role in this contract. However, this project information counts towards the 50-page limit. SF-330 Part I Section F. Example Projects Which Best Illustrate Proposed Team's Qualifications for this Contract: The Offeror shall provide up to (6) example projects where multiple team members worked together, if possible, that demonstrate the team's capability to perform work similar to that required for this contract. To be considered, example projects must have been performed by: (1) the Prime Offeror, (2) JV members and/or (3) proposed subcontractors and key personnel that have submitted a signed letter of commitment that will have substantial involvement in the contract. In addition work for the example projects must have started within the past five (5) years (from the synopsis release date) to be considered. Greater consideration will be given to projects that are more relevant. Example projects may include illustrations of the proposed team's qualifications including but not limited to project photographs, sketches, drawings, and additional information. Each project example must clearly identify the Offeror or team member who applied direct effort on the example project (including the applicable DUNS Number), the relative portion of the example project performed by the Offeror or team member, a description of the relevant example project task(s), and the results and/or deliverables provided. Due to the numerous potential scenarios involving JVs, subcontractors, etc., Offerors are placed on notice that if the Government cannot readily determine which proposed team member performed the work and in what capacity, that Offeror faces the possibility that no consideration will be given for that example project. No consideration will be given to projects that have not started within the past 5-years of the synopsis release date. The Past Performance Questionnaire, provided as Attachment 3 shall be sent to by each Project Point of contact (POC) listed in this section for completion and will be used by the Government to evaluate the Offeror's Past Performance. To be considered, the questionnaire must be submitted via email directly from the project's POC to Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist by the due date for SF-330's set forth in Section 5 of this synopsis. Any questionnaire submitted to the Government by the Offeror rather than the client will not be considered. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure the Project Owner for each example project is available to be reached by phone or email during the days immediately following the submission deadline. Part I Section G. Key Personnel Participation in Example Projects: No supplemental instruction applies to this section. Part I Section H. Additional Information: Offerors shall use this section to provide: (1) the responses to the scenarios set forth in Appendix A of this synopsis and (2) the proposed PWS and QASP for the Task Order 0001 Statement of Objectives (SOO) provided for the applicable zone the Offeror is competing. The responses to the scenarios count towards the 50-page limit of the SF-330. The proposed PWS and QASP for Task Order 0001 do not count towards the page limit. The applicable SOOs for each zone are provided as Attachments 4 through 6 of this synopsis. Please note that Offerors who include unacceptable conditions and assumptions in the proposed PWS for Task Order 0001 may not be considered for award. Discussions: In accordance with HSAR 3036.602-3, the Government intends to conduct discussions with at least three firms considered most highly qualified to perform the required work for each zone. The Contracting Officer will notify the Offerors of the date and time they are scheduled for discussions which may be conducted in person, by telephone, via virtual conference, or in writing. In the event an Offeror is selected to participate in discussions for any zone, the Offeror's program and project manager and other key project personnel proposed by the firm shall participate and shall: (1) address concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods of furnishing the required services and (2) provide an oral presentation of their qualifications and experience, proposed project approach and other data relevant to qualifications and experience in accordance with HSAM 3036.602-3(a)(6). The oral presentation is limited to the qualifications and other relevant information included in the Offeror's proposal (SF-330 and other qualification data submitted). During the oral presentation Offerors shall effectively articulate and communicate their qualifications and their responses to the seven (7) evaluation factors for the applicable zone and demonstrate the necessary technical knowledge. All Offerors will be afforded the same amount of time for discussions. The amount of time allotted for discussions will be provided by the Contracting Officer with the invitation to participate. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI): Offeror are put on notice that the solicitation and resultant contract will include the following OCI Provision: HSAR 3052.209-72 Organizational Conflicts of Interest. (a) Determination. The Government has determined that this effort may result in an actual or potential conflict of interest or may provide one or more offerors with the potential to attain an unfair competitive advantage. The nature of the conflict of interest (OCI) is the potential of/or an actual OCI of unequal access to information that creates an unfair competitive advantage on this procurement including, but not limited to: (1) Access to Risk MAP contractor proprietary data that is non-public and (2) FIMA data that is non-public related to this procurement, and not provided in the Virtual Library. The nature of this OCI may additionally include "impaired objectivity" if a current FEMA contractor in the performance of its current contract and/or task order assesses the effectiveness and/or performance of the PTS Contractors. (b) If any such conflict of interest is found to exist, the Contracting Officer may (1) disqualify the offeror, or (2) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to contract with the offeror and include the appropriate provisions to avoid, neutralize, mitigate, or waive such conflict in the contract awarded. After discussion with the offeror, the Contracting Officer may determine that the actual conflict cannot be avoided, neutralized, mitigated or otherwise resolved to the satisfaction of the Government, and the offeror may be found ineligible for award. (c) Disclosure: The offeror hereby represents, to the best of its knowledge that: (1) It is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this contract, or (2) It has included information in its proposal, providing all current information bearing on the existence of any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest, and has included a mitigation plan in accordance with paragraph (d) of this provision. (d) Mitigation. If an offeror with a potential or actual conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage believes the conflict can be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated, the offeror shall submit a mitigation plan to the Government for review. Award of a contract where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists shall not occur before Government approval of the mitigation plan. If a mitigation plan is approved, the restrictions of this provision do not apply to the extent defined in the mitigation plan. (e) Other Relevant Information: In addition to the mitigation plan, the Contracting Officer may require further relevant information from the offeror. The Contracting Officer will use all information submitted by the offeror, and any other relevant information known to DHS, to determine whether an award to the offeror may take place, and whether the mitigation plan adequately neutralizes or mitigates the conflict. (f) Corporation Change. The successful offeror shall inform the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the effective date of any corporate mergers, acquisitions, and/or divestures that may affect this provision. (g) Flow-down. The contractor shall insert the substance of this clause in each first tier subcontract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold. Limitation of Future Contracting. Offeror are put on notice that the solicitation and resultant contract will include the following Limitation of Future Contracting Provision: HSAR 3052.209-73 Limitation on Future Contracting. (a) The Contracting Officer has determined that this acquisition may give rise to a potential organizational conflict of interest. Accordingly, the attention of prospective offerors is invited to FAR Subpart 9.5 --Organizational Conflicts of Interest. (b) The nature of this conflict is reviewing the applicable reimbursement of successful appeals determined by FEMA in response to a proposed regulatory flood map change during the statutory 90-day appeal period. A second potential conflict is providing requirement/specifications development for future procurements that are not orders under this contract's scope of work. (c) The restrictions upon future contracting are as follows: (1) If the Contractor, under contract with an appellant to FEMA's proposed regulatory map change, is required to develop engineering studies or technical analysis that supports the appellant's submission to FEMA, the Contractor shall be ineligible to perform any reviews for applicable reimbursement for successful flood map appeals as a prime or subcontractor under an ensuing DHS contract and will be ineligible to receive reimbursement for services performed. This restriction shall remain in effect for the duration of the contract and all task orders issued. A second potential restriction applies. The contractor (inclusive of the prime contractor, JV members, and subcontractors) may not submit a proposal or serve as a subcontractor for any solicitation in which the contractor assisted with the development of the solicitation requirements. This restriction applies for the duration of the contract and all task orders. (2) To the extent that the work under this contract requires access to proprietary, business confidential, or financial data of other companies, and as long as these data remain proprietary or confidential, the Contractor shall protect these data from unauthorized use and disclosure and agrees not to use them to compete with those other companies. Phase-2: Instructions: The Contracting Officer will issue a solicitation and commence cost/price negotiations in accordance with FAR Part 15, beginning with the most preferred firm as determined by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) for each zone. The proposed cost/price and proposed PWS and QASP for Task Order 0001 for each zone the Offeror is competing will be the basis of cost/price negotiations. A separate price/cost proposal is required for each zone in the event an Offeror selected for negotiations for multiple zones. The price/cost proposal shall include a detailed breakdown of all direct and indirect costs and fee in accordance with FAR Table 15-2, Instructions for Submitting Cost/Price Proposals When Certified Cost or Pricing Data Are Required and must contain all applicable Disclosure Statements and other supplemental information which clearly indicates how the total proposed cost/price is derived. Because certified cost and pricing data will be required, each offeror must also submit information which will allow the CO to determine the Offeror's Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) compliance. Price/Cost negotiations will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.404 and 15.405 beginning with the most preferred firm for each zone. The Government reserves the right to negotiate any aspect of the proposed PWS and QASP in addition to cost/price during Phase-2. Negotiations will include: price/cost reasonableness, proposed small business subcontracting plan goals, and any applicable OCI Mitigation Plan. The Offeror shall submit sufficient evidence of responsibility for the Contracting Officer to make an affirmative determination of responsibility pursuant to the requirements of FAR Subsection 9.104-1 and the requirements of the solicitation and required representations and certifications. If a mutually satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated (inclusive of the proposed PWS, QASP and cost/price), or if the Offeror has an unmitigable OCI, the contracting officer will obtain a written final proposal revision from the firm and notify the firm that negotiations have been terminated. The contracting officer will then initiate negotiations with the next firm on the final selection list. This procedure will be continued until a mutually satisfactory contract has been negotiated. If negotiations fail with all selected firms, the contracting officer shall refer the matter to the selection authority who, after consulting with the contracting officer as to why a contract cannot be negotiated, may direct the evaluation board to recommend additional firms in accordance with FAR 36.602. 8. Evaluation of Offerors: a. Basis for Selection FEMA intends to issue three single award IDIQ contracts for three geographic zones using full and open competition. FEMA intends to award one contract to the most qualified, responsible Offeror for each zone with fair and reasonable cost/pricing. The Government will evaluate each proposal (SF-330 and other qualification data) against the evaluation factors stated in the synopsis to develop a ranking of the three (3) most qualified Offerors for each zone in accordance with HSAR 3036.602-3(a)(9). The methodology of FAR 36.6 will be used to rank Offerors for each zone based on: (1) the technical merit of their SF-330 and other qualification data submitted in response to the synopsis based on the evaluation factors, (2) an assessment of their past performance, and (3) the discussions conducted. The Government will assess and rank the SF-330s and other qualification data based on how well the Offerors addresses the five (5) selection criteria listed in FAR 36.602-1 and the two other evaluation criteria (reference FAR 35.602-1(a)(6)), which are listed below in descending order of importance for each zone Offerors are competing: (1) Specialized Experience and Technical Competence (2) Geographical location and knowledge of the locality (3) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time (4) Professional Qualifications (5) Past Performance (6) Proposed approach to example project scenarios (7) Proposed PWS and QASP for Task Order 0001. Based on the selection criteria, the Government will holistically evaluate its confidence in the Offeror's ability to successfully perform the work, and will numerically rank, in order of preference, at least three (3) firms that are considered to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services for each zone. The following confidence ratings apply: High Confidence - The Government has a high level of confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Moderate Confidence - The Government has a moderate level of confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement. Risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. Low Confidence - The Government has a low level of confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Neutral - Only applies to Past Performance. The Government cannot assess a level of confidence due to no relevant performance record identifiable upon which to base a meaningful confidence rating. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the Offeror and proposed subcontractors. Pursuant to FAR 6.202(a)(4) & (5), the Government reserves the right to limit offerors to one (1) contract award to ensure the continuous availability of reliable sources of services and to satisfy projected needs based on a history of high demand. Should an offeror be "selected" as the most highly qualified Offeror for more than one zone, the Government reserves the right to determine which zone the Offeror will be the most highly qualified for in the best interest of the Government. Once an Offeror is selected as the most highly qualified for a zone, they will not initially be considered for the remaining zones unless: (1) the Government is unable to negotiate a mutually satisfactory contract for each zone, (2) there is a lack of qualified Offerors, (2) and/or (3) if it is otherwise deemed to be in the best interest of the Government. Therefore, it is solely in the Government's discretion to award more than one IDIQ contract to an Offeror. The Government reserves the right to utilize fair opportunity procedures under FAR Part 16 with the three PTS contract holders in the event additional capacity is needed in any zone or a unique task order requirement arises that is not aligned to a particular zone. This work to be competed (if any) is considered to be incidental. b. Selection Criteria All factors and criteria listed below are considered as independent of one another and will be evaluated as stand-alone elements and will not be combined or augmented. The factors are listed in descending order of importance. The qualifications and information set forth in Sections A through G of the proposed SF-330 will be used to evaluate the following five (5) evaluation factors listed in FAR 36.602-1. Factor 1: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the contract based on qualifications demonstrated in the SF-330, Sections A through G for this factor. Offerors will be evaluated based on the following specialized experience and competence for this factor and any discussions conducted including the Offeror's ability to effectively convey its qualifications during discussions with the necessary technical knowledge. Specialized experience and technical competence in all zones will be evaluated based on the following: 1. Providing wind design, flood design, seismic design, physical security, multi-hazard design and lifelines infrastructure design. 2. Performing flood studies, including hydrologic, hydraulic, and coastal modeling and mapping for the NFIP. 3. Providing technical NFIP mapping support to include Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data, the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL), dam safety, building science, risk assessments, levees, alluvial fan flooding, mud flows, ice jam flooding, and developing and reviewing Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for completion of a NFIP flood study. Specialized experience and technical competence applicable to specific zones will be evaluated based on the following criteria: Zone-1 Specific (Regions I, II, III and V): 1. Strong aptitude in the realm of levees, understanding not only technical details for 44 CFR 65.10 compliance, but also shifting landscape in approaches from other agencies (like the USACE Quantitative Risk Assessments (QRAs)), and demonstrated experience and success in handling the de-accreditation process specifically in the Zone-1 states and territories. 2. Strong understanding and experience of 2D modeling and floodway analysis, awareness of new policies and standards being developed, and the ability to influence new solutions/guidance/policies that account for unique features in Zone-1 including distributed/split flow paths and impacts of levees. 3. Demonstrated experience coordinating with Federal, state, or local agencies in the acquisition of appropriate data and modeling of high hazard dams as well as in other highly-regulated water courses in Zone-1. 4. Demonstrated experience with vertical datums across Zone-1 states and territories, related activities by other federal agencies, and the difficulties on the local level on how transformations occur. Experience and capacity to successfully navigate data development steps that allow for creation and distribution of viable flood risk products to inform floodplain management requirements. Zone-2 Specific (Regions IV, VI and VII): 1. Demonstrated experience and expertise with rapid analysis (within several days) of potential impacts of an event (heavy flooding for all and hurricane/wind effects for Regions IV & VI). 2. Demonstrated experience and/or expertise with large area watershed Base Level Engineering analysis (both 1D and 2D), products, applications, and outreach. Zone-3 Specific (Regions VIII, IX, and X): 1. Strong aptitude in the realm of levees, understanding not only technical details for 44 CFR 65.10 compliance, but also shifting landscape in approaches from other agencies (like the USACE QRAs), and demonstrated experience and success in handling the de-accreditation process in Zone-3 states and territories. 2. Strong understanding and experience of 2D modeling and floodway analysis, awareness of new policies and standards being developed, and the ability to influence new solutions/guidance/policies that account for unique features in Zone-3 including distributed/split flow paths and impacts of levees. 3. Demonstrated experience with vertical datums across Zone-3 states and territories, related activities by other federal agencies, and the difficulties on the local level on how transformations occur. Experience with successfully completing data development steps that allow for creation and distribution of viable flood risk products to inform floodplain management requirements. Factor 2: Geographic Location and Knowledge of the Locality. The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the contract based on qualifications demonstrated in the SF-330, Sections A through G for this factor. This factor will be evaluated based on the following geographic location and knowledge of the locality applicable to specific zones and any discussions conducted including the Offeror's ability to effectively convey its qualifications during discussions with the necessary technical knowledge. Zone-1 Specific (Regions I, II, III and V): 1. Demonstrated knowledge and understanding of the unique factors and natural hazards associated with the weather, geography, geology, fluvial geomorphology of Zone-1 project areas and their relationships to determining and applying the best approaches for hydrology, hydraulics, and mapping for riverine and coastal analyses, including specific experience with the following: a. Coastal modeling & unique conditions (including coastal erosion) in the Great Lakes and on Atlantic Coast b. Modeling Zone-1 locations (specifically PA, VA, and WV) with Karst Topography 2. Demonstrated knowledge of the additional level of communication and coordination needed for Tribes as well as small, remote communities. Knowledge must be demonstrated by experience with work with impoverished communities, Tribes, small rural communities, and isolated geographical locations such as islands, territories, or unique political geographies such as Land Use Planning Commission (LUPCs) in Zone-1 states and territories. 3. Demonstrated knowledge of and experience working with Cooperating Technical Partners, State Governments, and/or Other Federal Agency regional offices within Zone-1, as well as familiarity with state and regional rules, regulations, permitting authorities, and modeling/floodplain management preferences. Zone-2 Specific (Regions IV, VI and VII): 1. Demonstrated knowledge of and experience working with Cooperating Technical Partners, State Governments, and/or Other Federal Agency regional offices within Zone-2, as well as familiarity with state and regional rules, regulations, permitting authorities, and modeling/floodplain management preferences. Zone-3 Specific (Regions VIII, IX, and X): 1. Demonstrated knowledge of the additional level of communication and coordination needed for Tribes as well as small, remote communities. Knowledge must be demonstrated by experience with work with impoverished communities, Tribes, small rural communities, and isolated geographical locations such as islands and territories. Factor 3: Capacity to Accomplish the Work in the Required Time The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the contract based on qualifications demonstrated in the SF-330, Sections A through G for this factor. This factor will be evaluated based on the following criteria and any discussions conducted including the Offeror's ability to effectively convey its qualifications during discussions with the necessary technical knowledge. 1. Capacity to perform concurrent multiple, complex risk mitigation and flood hazard modeling/mapping projects that require multi-Jurisdiction coordination at the Federal, State, Tribal, and/or local government levels in a geographic area comparable in size to one of the zones set forth in the synopsis concurrently; while accomplishing the work within required time limits and meeting quality standards. Consideration will also be given for demonstrated capacity to coordinate with non-government organizations (NGOs) and other Federal agencies. 2. Capacity to sustain steady-state work for a program comparable in scope of the PTS requirement without interruption or reduced quality of work while concurrently meeting expedited, large-scale staffing requirements that require the deployment of up to 100 qualified individuals with 48-hours advance notice necessary to provide post-disaster support services for multiple concurrent disaster declarations. Factor 4: Professional Qualifications The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the contract based on qualifications demonstrated in the SF-330, Sections A through G for this factor. This factor will be evaluated based on the following criteria and any discussions conducted including the Offeror's ability to effectively convey its qualifications during discussions with the necessary technical knowledge. Offerors shall demonstrate the professional qualifications required in the contract PWS. Additionally, professional qualifications related to specific zones will be evaluated based on the following criteria: Zone-1 Specific (Regions I, II, III and V): 1. Demonstrated successful execution of flood hazard modeling and mapping, including coastal flood hazard study experience, within the boundaries of Zone-1. Zone-2 Specific (Regions IV, VI and VII): 1. Demonstrated successful execution of flood hazard modeling and mapping, including coastal flood hazard study experience, within the boundaries of Zone-2. Zone-3 Specific (Regions VIII, IX, and X): 1. Demonstrated successful execution of modeling and mapping focused on characteristics concentrated in the Rocky Mountains and in the western United States, including mountain influence on hydrology/hydraulics, alluvial fans, braided rivers, arid landscapes, rain on snow events, atmospheric rivers, post-fire flood analyses and torrents, tsunamis, ice jams, glacial outburst flooding, channel migration, seismic impacts to soils in floodplains, mudslides, and lahars. Factor 5: Past Performance The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the IDIQ contract PWS based on responses to the past performance questionnaires received from the Project Owner references in Section F of the SF-330 for the six example projects provided. Consideration may be given to the past performance of the prime Offeror, JV members, and proposed subcontractors and key personnel. The Government may also consider any past performance information retrieved from the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and any other readily available information. An Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably if it lacks relevant past performance. Factor 6: Proposed Approach to Example Project Scenarios The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the contract based on qualifications demonstrated in the SF-330, Section H for this factor. Consideration will be given to the responses to the three (3) scenarios set forth in Appendix A of this synopsis within the constraints of the scope of work for this requirement and any discussions conducted including the Offeror's ability to effectively convey its qualifications during discussions with the necessary technical knowledge. Factor 7: Proposed Performance Work Statement for Task Order 0001 The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the contract based on qualifications demonstrated in the SF-330, Section H for this factor. The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the requirements of the Task Order 0001 SOO, based on the proposed PWS and QASP for the applicable zone. Consideration will also be given to the demonstrated understanding of the SOO requirements, sufficiency of the proposed level of effort and labor mix, and the sufficiency of the proposed expertise of the Offeror with respect to the complexity and size of the task order. 9. Proposed Price/Cost for Task Order 0001: Price/Cost negotiations will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.404 and 15.405 beginning with the most preferred firm in the final selection for each zone. To be considered for award the Offeror's proposed price/cost must be deemed fair and reasonable, the proposed small business subcontracting plan must be deemed acceptable, any proposed OCI Mitigation Plan must be deemed acceptable, and the Offeror must be deemed responsible as defined in FAR 9.104-1 for each zone they are competing. 10. Attachments and Appendices: Attachment 1 DHS Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), dated 08/01/2004 2 Contract Performance Work Statement (PWS), dated 02/23/2021 3 Past Performance Questionnaire, dated 02/24/2021 4 Task Order 0001 Statement of Objectives (SOO) Zone-1, dated 02/24/2021 5 Task Order 0001 Statement of Objectives (SOO) Zone-2, dated 02/24/2021 6 Task Order 0001 Statement of Objectives (SOO) Zone-3, dated 02/24/2021 Appendix A Example Project Scenarios, dated 02/23/2021 11. Contractor Facilitation Support: Contractor support will be used to facilitate technical and price evaluations. Garud Technology Services Inc (GTS) will be used to provide technical evaluation facilitation and will have access to proposals and proprietary information included in the proposal. GTS' support will be limited to facilitation and administrative support. GTS staff will not evaluate technical proposals or provide any input or opinions with respect to the technical evaluation. Further, the price determinations of fair and reasonableness will be made by the Contracting Officer. GTS' Blanket Purchase Agreement with FEMA includes the required Limitation of Future Contracting and Non- disclosure Agreements to permit access to proposal information. APPENDIX A - PROJECT SCENARIOS PTS Scenario 1 -- Swift Creek Watershed Background: FEMA Region A has recently acquired USGS 3-dimensional Elevation Program (3DEP) compliant Quality Level 2 Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data for the entire State of Highland that encompasses this watershed. Swift Creek is a large watershed within the State of Highland and by land area covers 75% of the State. The watershed is also influenced by coastal flooding. The State's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are in digital format and many of the flooding sources were digitized during Map Modernization. The only exception is the Town of Neverflood, the State's capital and most populous city. Neverflood is an inland Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) community and has replaced 50% of its detailed flooding sources with two-dimensional modeling after a recent 2018 FIRM update. The terrain for most of the watershed is relatively flat making one-dimensional hydraulic modeling overly conservative in depicting the existing floodplains. Development in this area has increased dramatically after a combination of newly discovered oil and natural gas reserves were found in the State and a series of large technology firms have relocated in the area spurring rapid job growth. Local community planners want to capitalize on FEMA data as it becomes available to assist with updating their Hazard Mitigation Plan and Land Use Management Plan. However, several of the larger inland communities are frustrated with the existing data on their FIRMs as several flash flood events stemming from smaller tropical events caused flooding in residential areas outside the existing Special Flood Hazard Area. The coastal community has expressed interest in better understanding their flood risk not only today, but also 25-50 years from now. FEMA Region A wants to provide new regulatory FIRMs and they also want to use this geography to explore the possibility of producing graduated hazard data to support future planning efforts. Additionally, with the rapid growth, the State is pushing to get updated information to the communities as soon as possible to ensure safe development. Instructions: The offeror shall describe potential methods for meeting these local needs by utilizing existing suites of regulatory and non-regulatory products, considering the factors impacting flood hazards in these types of environments, and identifying where existing study data may require augmentation or production using new methods to provide a better picture of risk for end-users. The offeror should consider and propose how FEMA programs and community users could potentially integrate the use of such data in the future. The offeror should also identify what assumptions were used to assist in evaluating this fictional geography. The offeror will provide a description of their solution, including how they will work with FEMA, other providers, and stakeholders. PTS Scenario 2 -- Disaster Strikes Background: Early in the first option year of the PTS contract a powerful earthquake (M7.0) does widespread significant damage along several inland states, with Jamestown, by far the largest city in the area, being hit the hardest. Along the Preston River upstream of Jamestown, the Bascom Dam was compromised. As a result of the earthquake, the reservoir emptied and sent a flume of water downstream further impacting Jamestown. This is easily the largest disaster in the last 50 years in the region. Most homes and businesses along the shores of the Preston River in Jamestown have been substantially damaged or destroyed as they were built long before NFIP standards were adopted. Other areas within Jamestown have been damaged from the combined effects of the earthquake and the dam failure flood. This community desperately wants information on recovery and their mitigation options. They are confused about different options regarding how and where to rebuild and how best to mitigate future disasters while allowing homeowners to rebuild as quickly as possible. FEMA expects the offeror to provide support to the Joint Field Office within days of the field request and begin delivering risk and hazard information in the affected areas, engaging other providers as needed. The offeror shall support as many non---inherently governmental tasks as possible as 80% of the Regional Offices in the area have been deployed and HQ Risk Management resources are depleted. Continuity of Operations is critical. Instructions: The offeror shall describe their mobilization approach to support the Joint Field Office while balancing needs for the Regional and HQ offices. The offeror shall describe how they would perform a post-disaster assessment of the infrastructure impacted, perform an evaluation of structure damage by hazard type, and provide mitigation assessment and opportunities based on the support provided to the Regional Office and HQ across multiple mitigation programs. There are a number of FEMA Risk Management/Risk Analysis program elements that can be considered when providing a comprehensive and integrated solution to the community, which includes, but not limited to Dam Safety, Flood Hazard Mapping, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, Natural Hazards Risk Assessment Program, and Building Science. The offeror should also identify what assumptions were used to assist in evaluating this fictional geography. The offeror will provide a description of their solution to rapidly mobilize resources to the area, how they plan to support FEMA in assessing the impacts of multiple hazards, and their approach in considering the various RMD, FIMA and FEMA programs and components in outlining mitigation opportunities for this community. PTS Scenario 3 -- Maintaining Service Capacity and Quality with Competing Demands Background: There are over 1,400 ongoing Risk MAP projects in production with an average completion timeframe of 6-8 years. The Risk MAP program is also undergoing an evolution through the Future of Flood Risk Data (FFRD), where numerous statutory components, Technical Mapping Advisory Council recommendations, and exploratory innovations will help Risk Management shift from a binary focus of flood hazard to a graduated depiction of flood risk. FEMA anticipates this evolutionary pivot to take several years to complete. Instructions: The offeror shall demonstrate the capability to sustain and balance technical and staff resources to advance Risk MAP program goals and objectives for the respective geographic zone while concurrently advancing the evolution of FFRD without hindering the schedule and quality of work for both areas of focus. The offeror shall also provide its strategic approach to provide both: (1) steady state PTS support for the FEMA Regions and FEMA/HQ and (2) rapid response and deployment of large scale staffing for multiple concurrent major disaster support is requested while sustaining the Risk MAP project work concurrently. The offeror shall provide a description of their solution to efficiently advance ongoing Risk MAP projects without delay or quality compromises and balance the program needs for the advancement of FFRD. The offeror will describe any strategic approach changes needed during a disaster season similar to the 2017 Hurricane season. The offeror will also provide recommendations on specific focus areas for FEMA to consider within the PTS contract that will propel the implementation of FFRD more efficiently.

Link/URL: https://beta.sam.gov/opp/723f9b3d1fd343d58c0cc95713dac9fa/view