Question_to_140A0926Q0006_Haystack___Baca_SDV_2_Govt_Response_0004.pdf

Questions to Solicitation 140A0926Q0006 – Haystack and Baca Shep Dip Vat (SDV) Sampling/Removal

1. Has there been any previous investigation/sampling work done at any of the three (3) dip vat sites? If yes, can those reports/data be provided?

BIA BEM have been utilizing past SDV reports supplied by the Navajo Nation EPA;

however, these reports are currently unavailable. Although toxaphene sampling was previously conducted at these sites, soil sampling for contamination is required for all three locations.

2. SOW, Task II: Coordination/Sampling/Analyses - Should the Contractor only include analysis for EPA Method 8081A (chlorinated pesticides, toxaphene) as part of Phase I Investigations? Should arsenic analyses be included as a potential contaminant of concern?

Yes

3. SOW, Task VI: Disposal – What should the contractor plan for is the contamination is not acceptable at Subtitle D landfill (e.g., non-hazardous waste)? Will this be considered a change and we will work with BIA on a modification for increased transportation and disposal costs for hazardous waste?

The project involves cleaning up a contaminated area, making the disposal of waste hazardous. A change order should not be necessary; the contractor should include estimates for both hazardous and non-hazardous waste disposal.

4. Bid Schedule – should the Contractor show costs for each dip vat? Currently the bid schedule is combined across the 3 dip vat sites.

No, the project was scoped to include all three SDVs under a single project bid.

5. Bid Schedule – Task 3, what does “Soil sampling (Vat area 363 boring at 3 samples each @

$165)” mean? Disregard this statement, prior internal notes.

6. SOW, Task I: Pre-Work Submittals – what is the level of effort expected for the consultation with the Navajo Nation Historical Preservation Program for a cultural review and the Navajo Nation Fish and Wildlife department for a biological review for the 3 separate dip vat sites? Who approves the Cultural Resource Compliance Form Section 106 and Biological Resource Compliance Form Section 7, Endangered Species Act are required to determine action for NEPA compliance for each of the 3 dip vat sites?

Consultation involves submitting applications and following up. Attached is the clearance process for each department.

7. SOW, Task IV: Removal

a. Does BIA have estimated quantities for the removal/disposal of the debris and structural components (concrete dip vat, entrance pads, exit pads, and associated piping/concrete structures, wooden posts, metal fencing posts, fencing wire, tires, car parts, etc.) at each of the 3 dip vat sites?

Similar projects have estimated the removal of approximately 900 cubic yards of soil. In the last project, 554 tons of concrete and contaminated soil were disposed of. The quantity of soil disposal will depend on the level of contamination.

The general waste debris at the site is estimated to be less than 20 cubic yards. Contractors are invited to visit both Baca sites. However, the Haystack site is currently locked and will only be accessible when the project starts.

Please note that the site visit will be at the contractor's own expense.

b. Does BIA have estimated quantities for the removal/disposal of contaminated soil at each of the 3 dip vat sites?

See above response.

8. SOW, Task V: Excavation – Does BIA have criteria for what is considered “clean soil” backfill? If yes, can those criteria be provided? Will BIA approve the backfill sources prior to use by the Contractor?

Clean soil is free and clear of hazardous contaminants. No need for approval is clean fill is certified, and certification is submitted in final report.

9. Will BIA consider a 1-week extension to the due date to provide additional time to receive answers to questions and to work on the responses with our vendors and subcontractors?

Subject to the discretion of the Acquisition Department.