Entomological Support for El Segundo Blue Butterfly

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. (ii) Solicitation F4D3D39117A001 is issued as a request for quotation (RFQ). (iii) This solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-12. (iv) This procurement is being issued as a 100% Small Business Set-Aside under NAICS code 541620 and small business size standard $7.0M. (v) Entomological Support for El Segundo Blue Butterfly. (vi) Period of Performance will be 6 months, as outlined in Statement of Work. (vii) The provision at 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors--Commercial, applies to this acquisition. (viii) 52.212-2, Evaluation--Commercial Items applies. Quotes will be evaluated on price and technical capability. (ix) Offerors must include a completed copy of the provision at 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications--Commercial Items, or complete on ORCA website: http://orca.bpn.gov/ with its offer. (x) Clause 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions--Commercial Items, applies to this acquisition. (xi) Clause 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required To Implement Statutes Or Executive Orders--Commercial Items to include clauses 52.204-9--Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel, 52.209-5--Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Proposed Debarment, and Other Responsibility Matters, 52.209-6--Protecting the Government's Interest When Subcontracting with Contractors Debarred, Suspended, or Proposed for Debarment, 52.232-33--Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer--Central Contractor Registration, 52.237-3--Continuity of Services, 52.247-34--F.O.B. Destination, 252.232-7003--Electronic Submission of Payment Requests, and 5352.201-9101--Ombudsman. (xii) Offers are accepted via fax or email and are due by 3 June 2009 at 3 pm (PDT). (xiii) You can contact the primary Contract Administrator, SSgt Jason Burdett (805-606-2480; jason.burdett@vandenberg.af.mil). SSgt Burdett can also be reached via fax at 805-606-5193. --STATEMENT OF WORK-- STATEMENT OF WORK FOR XUMUOS278409 - MGT, SPECIES, EL SEGUNDO BLUE BUTTERFLY SOW for Entomological Specialist AT VANDENBERG AFB, CA Project Description Contractor will provide specialized entomological support to 30 CES/CEVNN staff. The following activities are expected from the contractor; assistance in designing survey protocol to maximize the effectiveness of brief flight periods, ground truthing previous remote sensing models predicting where butterflies are anticipated, assistance with estimating population of endangered butterflies and their habitat on base, providing entomological training to Vandenberg biologists and providing input, as needed, in other regulatory requirements which require species specialized, independent, scientific recommendations. The contractor must be an experienced entomologist, familiar with habitat nuances that are present in the Euphilotes battoides complex (group of butterflies). This experience and knowledge will allow the contractor to know what anomalies to look for when providing recommendations to VAFB staff. Contractor must have extensive and published experience in restoration efforts for butterflies in the Euphilotes battoides complex. Contractor will provide assistance to 30 CES/CEVNN in locating potential sites for restoration, suggested removal methods, seed collection and other general support for future habitat restoration activities. This contractor will provide 120 hours of support, to include at least 80 hours of flight season surveying. 30 CES/CEVNN will coordinate with contractor when the buckwheat plants bloom to ensure contractor arrives at the correct time. It is anticipated that the contractor will make 3-4 trips each lasting 2-3 days during the flight season. Travel on the installation will also be expected, as the butterfly populations are widely distributed on the installation and are often remote. Justification - Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), the Air Force is required to manage for threatened and endangered species while supporting the Air Force mission. - IAW ESOHCAMP NR.20.1.US, - Verify that a survey has been done to determine if there are any threatened or endangered species if conditions are present that such a species could be present. - Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a670f).and AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management. Military departments are required to coordinate with federal and state agencies in the planning and management of natural resources on military installations. - EO 11312, Invasive Species Management - National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) Tasking Plan of Action: 1. PhD-level entomologist must be willing to train individuals and write a letter of reference to USFWS attesting to their professional skills. 2. Contractor will survey and collect appropriate data under appropriate weather conditions. If surveying requires other sensitive biological areas (such as western snowy plover and California least tern nesting areas) entomologist must be escorted by permitted biologists. 3. All areas occupied by the ESBB and areas surveyed will be mapped, and GIS shapefiles will be submitted to CEVNN upon completion of the surveys. Data collected should be accurate to within less than 3 meters. 4. Surveyors must be willing to add qualified individuals to their permits as - supervised individuals while surveying on Vandenberg. - Supervised individuals may help surveyors record location data (GPS), however, it is ultimately the permit holder's responsibility to record all data and in the event of a - supervised individual not being available for a survey, the Permit Holder will ensure this is accomplished. 5. A final report will detail the all work pertaining to the El Segundo blue butterfly, performed under this contract will be submitted to VAFB biologists at the end of the project. Contractor will complete and submit California Natural Diversity Database forms for all positive sightings. 6. Contractor must submit a copy of current 10 (a) (1) (A) recovery permit for - Take by Pursuit of El Segundo Blue Butterfly from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service with bid offer. 7. Copies of field notes will be given to 30 CES/CEVN on a quarterly basis. 8. Any findings of the ESBB will be IMMEDIATELY reported to a 30 CES/CEVNN biologist, to ensure proper notification measures through appropriate communication channels are accomplished. Surveyors must wait 24 hours before sharing results of work with anyone outside of the VAFB ESBB Task team. 9. This Statement of Work includes all labor and supplies for completing this project. Site Visit and Data Acquisition: Contractor will follow GIS data format and specifications will be provided by 30 CES/CEVN, and are outlined in Attachment A. Expected Outcome: A report and two GIS layers are the expected outcome from this survey. One GIS layer will detail the effort of all surveyed areas. The other GIS layer will detail occupied areas. The report will include, at a minimum, the following: recommended survey protocol, ground-truthing of existing predictive models of butterfly localities, recommendations for calculating population of endangered butterflies and their habitat on base, and any other regulatory or entomological assistance accomplished under this contract. Deliverable format(s): A draft report (2 hard copies + 1 electronic CD copy with the document in Word format and maps as .mxd files) will be provided to CEVNN no later than 15 November 2009. Following receipt of comments from CEVNN, a final report and final maps will be provided within 30 days (3 copies with comb binding; 2 electronic CD copies, with the document in pdf format and the maps as GIS .mxd files. GIS shapefiles of the potential habitat surveyed, occupied areas, and all areas surveyed. Milestones ECD Action (include deliverables) OPR (Last name /Office symbol) 1 May 2009 Obtain copies of 10 (a) 1 (A) permits from entomologist Liz Bell 30 CES/CEVNN 17 May 2009 Kick-off meeting to review survey recommendations, review and comment on results of GIS analysis. Contractor/ Liz Bell 10 Jun 2009 VAFB ESBB Action Team meeting (attendance includes USFWS, surveyors, trainer and 30 CES/CEVN) Contractor/ Liz Bell 1 June - 15 Sep 09 ESBB flight surveys Contractor 15 Nov 09 Draft report of ESBB surveys to 30 CES/CEVNN Contractor 15 Dec 09 Final report and shapefiles to 30 CES/CEVNN Contractor Deliverables Deliverable # hard copies # e-copies (include format types) Estimated pages/layers Date Due or Days after award Draft Report 2 1 NTE 80 15 Nov 09 Final Report 2 1 NTE 80 15 Dec 09 GIS info (hard copies of maps included in report) 1 2 layers 15 Dec 09 Points of Contact Name Organi-zation Mailing address Phone number Fax no. E-mail address Liz Bell CEVNN 1028 Iceland Ave, VAFB, CA 93437 805-605-0392 606-6137 Liz.Bell@ vandenberg.af.mil Special Conditions Government furnished information/materials. CEVNN will provide any existing information and metadata format for GIS coverage. Qualified personnel to perform contract tasks. The contractor shall ensure that only qualified, competent personnel carry out the tasks outlined in this SOW. Competent is defined as registered professional or, where registration is not applicable, trained and certified with a degree in a related field of study. Exceptions are administrative and support personnel who participate in document publication. All deliverables are property of the USAF. All materials gathered and/or developed in the performance of these tasks listed shall be returned to and become property of the AF; and shall not be used and/or distributed by the contractor without specific written permission of the Project Manager. Deliverable Formats. All electronic documents are to be in Microsoft Office (or whatever format is compatible with installation IT system). All documents, including photographs and maps, are to be dated. Final electronic deliverables are to be in MS Word (*.doc), Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf), and ArcGIS (.mxd and shapefiles). Data Standards. GeoSpatial Data shall be consistent with the rest of the VAFB ESBB Task Team. Polygon acquisition data should be accurate within 10m. While draft data is expected to contain overlapping polygons, the final GIS data layer should not contain polygon overlaps. Refer to Attachment A. Public disclosure. The contractor (nor staff) shall not give news releases or conduct media interviews concerning the work performed or results thereof. All information for public release will be released by the installation PAO; all requests for information, including freedom of information act, shall be directed to the PAO and installation project manager. Contract Type X Firm Fixed Price Period of Performance All tasks must be completed by __15 Dec 09_ or no more than __12___ months. Attachment A Strategies for developing standard contract deliverable language for GeoBase programs Three options (or any combination thereof): 1. Address by reference to organizations responsible for policy and guidance: - as described under current policy and guidance established by the AF/ILE and AF-CIO, - as described under current policy and guidance by the 38EIG, etc. 2. Address by reference to existing policy and guidance documents: - as described in the current USAF Garrison Mapping CONOPS.. - as required under current guidance, including the USAF Enterprise GeoBase Architecture and the USAF GeoBase Imagery Data Architecture . 3. Address explicitly and specifically under current guidance and policy: If this option is exercised, suggest developing measurable performance metrics for each contract deliverable (i.e. each - map layer or entity as defined in the SDSFIE) in the following areas: 3.1 Completeness For each map layer, will this effort map all of the base or just a portion? Will this effort include any or all GSUs? 3.2 Currency What is the acceptable temporal delay before changed conditions are delivered to the Geo Integration Office and are represented by the GeoBase service? 3.3 Accuracy Accuracy should be measured in two dimensions, positional accuracy and attribute accuracy - 3.3.1 Positional Accuracy - Vector Data: Section 5.1.5.2 Spatial Accuracy, USAF GeoBase Enterprise Architecture v.1.0, reads: - CIP and MDS vector data (points, lines, polygons) should be mapped at 1:1200 (1=100) scale or better for base cantonment areas and 1:4800 (1=400) scale or better for undeveloped (natural) base areas. CIP and MDS data should meet accuracy standards set forth in the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) Accuracy Standards for Large Scale Maps and the FGDC National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA) at those map scales. NSSDA accuracy standards and accuracy quantification methodologies are provided in FGDC STD 007.4-2002 and FGDC STD 007.3-1998, respectively. The National Map Accuracy Standards (NMAS) (U.S. Bureau of the Budget, 1947) may be used to assess spatial accuracy at map scales smaller than 1:20,000 and are superseded by the ASPRS and FGDC NSSDA accuracy standards at map scales identified above. The use of threshold values should be used to set quantitative standards tied to the NSSDA, and ASPRS standards respectively. Project costs and functional accuracy requirements should be carefully considered to establish appropriate thresholds for each map layer. Contract deliverables should be measured by both the contractor and the government organization to meet these thresholds to ensure data quality, as contracted. Vertical Accuracy - for any product that models elevation (i.e. contours, DEM, LIDAR, extruded building heights, etc.). 3.3.1 Positional Accuracy - Imagery: 3.3.2 Attribute Accuracy - Section 5.1.1.1 Spatial Data Standards for Facilities, Infrastructure, and the Environment, USAF GeoBase Enterprise Architecture v.1.0, second sentence reads, - A standard interpretation of the SDSFIE will be established during the - transitional architecture phase. - Installations should adopt this standard data model once it is available. Until this standard is available, organizations should at a minimum follow the following fundamental standards and practices: Attribute table structure - Section 5.1.1.1 Spatial Data Standards for Facilities, Infrastructure, and the Environment, USAF GeoBase Enterprise Architecture v.1.0, first sentence, reads: - Installation geospatial data should be organized using SDSFIE, Version 2.2 or greater. - Attribute fields shall not be deleted after created from the CADD-GIS Technology Center's database generator tool, nor shall specifications for attribute fields be modified after they have been created. Attribute table field population - Section 3.5.1 Attribute Storage Location, USAF GeoBase Enterprise Architecture v.1.0, reads, - Columns in the SDSFIE tables should store the following: - Primary and foreign keys facilitating relational join to AIS database tables; - Any descriptive information for which there is no existing column in an AIS database table; - Generic attributes that may be of value to numerous functional communities (such as building number and street name). Attribute table field values - SDSFIE domain values should be used. If exceptions are needed, organizations should work with their unit's GIO to identify the technical requirement for a revision to the SDSFIE and forward this suggestion and requests for exceptions to the current release in use through their MAJCOM to the HAF GIO (for the CIP) or respective FOA (MDSs). Attribute value accuracy - Measured by sampling and verification. Several standard statistical methods may be employed. 3.4 Documentation - Section 5.1.5.3 Metadata (CSDGM), USAF GeoBase Enterprise Architecture v.1.0, second paragraph, reads: - USAF installations shall capture all metadata elements classified as mandatory and mandatory-if-applicable. These elements can be found in the FGDC CSDGM Metadata Workbook, which can be downloaded at http://www.fgdc.gov/publications/documents/metadata/workbook_0501_bmk.pdf. A brief visual summary of mandatory metadata is included in Appendix D. The HAF GIO has not as yet published specific suggestions for metadata values for the Common Installation Picture (CIP). FOAs may also be developing guidelines with standard and/or suggested metadata values for Mission Data Sets (MDSs). Until such standards are established, organizations may wish to model a metadata value content standard that meets their needs. Appendix B of the DoD Installation Visualization Tool Quality Assurance Plan (IVT QAP) is an example of such a standard. 3.5 File Format What is the system architecture precedent or plan at your base or MAJCOM? For ESRI architectures, suggest first personal Geodatabases, then shapefiles. Projection parameters and XML metadata should be stored natively within the personal Geodatabase .mdb file. If shapefiles are to be delivered, be clear about the need for all three subfile types (.shp, .shx, .dxf) as well as projection parameters presented as a .prj file and an .xml file for metadata all with the same name and in the same directory when delivered. 3.6 Geospatial Data Registration Section 5.1.5.1 Geospatial Data Registration, USAF GeoBase Enterprise Architecture v.1.0, first paragraph, reads: - The CIP and MDS should be stored in the Universal Transverse Mercator 1983 (UTM83) coordinate system, Transverse Mercator projection, Geodetic Reference System 1980 (GRS80) spheroid, World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) datum, and use metric coordinate units. 3.7 Geometric representation and logical consistency Geometric representation varies according to the feature being represented. The most common need is for area polygons to close. The - cleanliness of editing can also be an issue, if overshoots and undershoots remain. Remember to clarify the need for continuity on linear features when needed for geometric networks, and principles of intersection, adjacency (contiguous features), nesting, and allowance for overlapping features (when appropriate) and whether multipart topology for point, line, and area represented features is appropriate for the information you are trying to represent. Logical consistency must be considered particularly where flow is an issue in a linear network (i.e. sanitary and storm sewers running downhill).