Add 2 - QA for RFP 2026010.pdf

DEP Solicitation No. 2026010 Addendum No. 2 Page 1 of 21

ADDENDUM No. 2

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

DEP Procurement Section

3800 Commonwealth Boulevard, MS#93 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

April 29, 2026

Addendum To: DEP Solicitation No. 2026010 entitled “Re-Advertisement for Petroleum Products Corporation Superfund Site Remedial Action Services”

The Department hereby answers questions posed by prospective Vendors. This addendum does not need to be returned with the response.

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

1.

3.4.2.3 b) ii 19 of 35

Instead of PE licensure, can Years of Experience be acceptable for the Soil Mixing Specialist? Or, may the Specialist be either a PE or a PG? Or, work under the direction of a PE?

No. See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 3.4.2.3 (a) (ii). The Soil Mixing Specialist shall be a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Florida.

2.

May Contractors who are pursuing this contract as Prime also serve as a Subconsultant on other Teams pursuing this contract?

See paragraph #32 of Attachment 1, Standard Terms and Conditions of Draft Contract, and paragraph #7 of Attachment 2, Special Terms and Conditions of the Draft Contract.

3.

May Subcontractors serve on multiple teams?

See the answer to question #2.

4.

3.4.2.3 18 of 35

What are the Requirements of the Field Engineer?

(i.e. Degree in Engineering; Years of Experience) Must the Field Engineer be a Licensed PE?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 3.4.2.3.

The Field Engineer is not required to be a Licensed PE.

5.

Since funding for this work is coming from the ITF (for Petroleum Sites Remediation), must Bidders be ATCs to propose on this opportunity / Are Non-ATCs allowed to Bid?

And, if Non-ATCs can Prime, can the FDEP/EPA provide the Justification for this allowance?

Addendum No. 2 Page 2 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

Non-ATC’s may submit a response. See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 2.2.

For the justification, see the attached Addendum No. 2

– Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2, 3.4.2.2 and 4.1.

6.

If Non-ATCs are allowed to respond to this RFP (2026010), will there be any Points added to the Evaluation Score of Respondents who are ATCs?

No.

7.

Can the FDEP please post a link to or copy of the Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting Slides (especially for those who called in and could not “see” the slides during the Pre-Bid Conference)?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2. The Mandatory Pre-Response Conference PowerPoint presentation is available on the General Site Files link.

8.

Would the FDEP please share the List of All Attendees of the Mandatory Pre-Response Conference?

Please see the attached Attendance Report Pre- Response Conference RFP 2026010.

9.

Can you confirm if companies that are contracted directly to the FDEP to manage PRP-funded work may bid on this project?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 2.2.

Vendors who have provided environmental design or remediation services on this Site after August 2021 shall not respond due to a conflict of interest.

10.

Are Joint Ventures acceptable and allowed to Bid on this project (RFP 2026010) as Prime?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 2.17.

11.

1.8 6

Would the FDEP please consider posting Answers to Questions as they come in, as opposed to posting all Answers on or about 03/24/26, especially relative to Questions that potentially impact Proposal/Quals and/or Bid Development?

No.

12.

4 27

Scope items #20, #21, & #22 mention Asbestos and Lead Abatement Services and Universal Waste Services will potentially be needed.

Please confirm that there are hazardous material surveys available at this time.

Addendum No. 2 Page 3 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

Are we to assume that we can provide a quote for "clean demolition"?

There are no hazardous material surveys at this time.

The Contractor shall provide rates based on the items detailed in Form D – Rate Schedule.

The Remedial Action (RA) Work Plan shall include a Building Demolition and Removal Plan see Section 01 36 00 and Section 02 41 16 of the Design Technical Specifications (DTS - also referenced in this RFP as Attachment 9 of the Draft Contract).

13.

Are there any soil characterization reports available at this time?

Data on soil characterization is available, but not limited to, the Pre-Design Investigation Data Report (OU-1/OU-2), Dated March 7, 2023.

General Site Files are available on the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2.

14.

Technical Specifications, Section 31 05 05-

AGGREGATES FOR

EARTHWORK

Page 73, Part

1.4. Quality

Control, Point F 3

SECTION 31 05 05 AGGREGATES FOR EARTHWORK,

Part 1.4. 3 states that “Gravel, rock or stone backfill, consisting of virgin (i.e., clean) material from a permitted mine or quarry, will be exempt from chemical testing requirements provided that it contains less than 10% by weight material passing the No. 80 sieve.”

According to Quarry material specification sheets, Fine Aggregates, Fine Aggregate Local Fill & the Coarse Aggregate Base contain more than 10% by weight passing the No. 80 Sieve.

Will The FDEP make an exemption from chemical testing of virgin materials coming from the Quarry if the clean fill material contains more than 10% by weight passing No. 80 Sieve?

An exemption would only be provided following DEP and EPA review and approval of the RA Work Plan and Excavation and Back fill plan.

15.

Technical Specifications, Section 31 05 05-

AGGREGATES FOR

EARTHWORK

Page 77, Part

2.1 Landscape

Soil, Table 31

05 05-E

SECTION 31 05 05 AGGREGATES FOR EARTHWORK,

Table 31 05 05-E requires the PH of the soil to be between 5.5 to 7.0.

All the landscape soil in south Florida has an average pH of 8.0.

Will FDEP accept a soil with a pH of 7.8 to 8.0?

See the answer to question #14.

16. - Technical Specifications, Section 31 05 05-

Page 72, Part

1.4 Quality

In Technical Specifications, Section 31 05 05, Page 72, Point F1. b 2 Composite samples, states that the

Addendum No. 2 Page 4 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

AGGREGATES FOR

EARTHWORK

Control, Point F 1.b. 2

Composite Samples composite samples need to be analyzed for “Herbicides by USEPA SW-846 Method 8151A”.

Will FDEP accept an equivalent analytical method for Herbicides, EPA Method 8321 for USEPA SW-846 Method 8151A?

The acceptance of an equivalent analytical method would only be provided following DEP and EPA review and approval of the Field Sampling Plan (FSP) and Quality Assurance Project Plan.

17.

-Form D – Rate Schedule, Drawing Plans

Page 2- Initial Contract

Term, Item No. 14.1 and

14.2

Drawing Plans, Page

G004 & G-005

Form D- Rate Schedule item No 14,1 & 14.2 list 62 wells to be abandoned. The drawing plans, page G-004 & G-005, on the other hand list up to 160 wells to be abandoned.

Which is the exact # of monitoring wells to be abandoned?

See Drawing G-004 of the DTS, for the monitoring wells that are to be abandoned.

The monitoring wells on Drawing G-005 of the DTS will be incorporated into the ISS treatment area and will not require individual grouting.

18.

- Drawings – Drawing G-004

There are 3 wells to be abandoned by Method 2 that have incomplete information. Well FDEP has a diameter of 24” but NO depth. Well RW1-OW1 has a diameter of 8 inches but NO depth. Well RW6 has a diameter of 8 inches but NO depth. Can depths for these wells be provided?

DEP does not have specific information regarding the depths of these 3 wells. DEP estimates that the wells are 30 feet or less. See Form D – Rate Schedule, Item #14.2, pricing for depths of 30 feet and under.

19.

RFP Section 1.3 Anticipated Contract terms and Renewals

Page #5

RFP Section 1.3 indicates a five-year contract term with the option for up to three additional one-year renewals.

Can you confirm whether the work is expected to be performed at a specific or predetermined dollar amount each year, or if the contract is structured so that the contractor performs work on an as-needed basis with no guaranteed annual minimum?

In other words, should bidders assume that only a limited amount of work may be issued each year depending on the agency’s needs and available funding?

Addendum No. 2 Page 5 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

Can you please provide any other reason the Department foresees the project schedule would require an extension of the Period of Performance into the three renewal years for the base contract work?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.3 (b) (5) and Section 4.4.

The Department anticipates the completion of services within the Initial Contract Term (Five (5) year period) of the Contract.

Respondents are required to provide renewal rates on Form D – Rate Schedule in the event a renewal contract term is needed.

20.

-Form D -

Are there any project timeline requirements with respect to items listed under Bid Form - Initial Contract Term?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.3 b. 5. and Section 4.4.

21.

3.4 Page # 16

Regarding the submittal requirements for a hard copy of the Response, is a “Wet” signature required to be placed on the original document or will an electronic signature on the printed hard copy suffice?

A wet signature is not required. An electronic signature on the hard copy of the Response is acceptable.

22.

3.4.22.3 d

RFP Section 4.3 a Deliverable 10 – In-Situ

Stabilization/Solidification Services (ISS)

Page #19

Page #25

The RFP only indicates ISS by Large Diameter Augers is the only acceptable ISS methodology for the site soils, while Section 3.1.A of Technical Specifications 02 55 00 states that the Contractor may “Employ the use of auger and/or excavator bucket mixing equipment or combination of methods at the Contractor’s discretion.” Please clarify if ISS of the site soils (other than the LDA ISS wall around Building K2) can been done using excavator bucket mixing at the Contractor’s discretion.

Items for ISS treatment are included in Form D - Rate Schedule and shall not be changed.

ISS mixing includes auger mixing, excavator bucket mixing and jet grouting. Variations of proposed ISS mixing methods may be approved by DEP and EPA during the RA Work Plan development and approval.

The development and approval would include technical justification demonstrating equivalent ISS specifications will be achieved.

Addendum No. 2 Page 6 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

The acceptance of an equivalent ISS method would only be provided following DEP and EPA review and approval of the ISS Work Plan.

Alternative ISS methods are not permitted surrounding the K-2 building.

23.

Specification 02 55 00 - Paragraph

1.4.A.2

Page #4 of section 02 55

The qualifications for the Soil Mixing Specialist require the person to be a licensed Professional Engineer (PE) and to be onsite with no other function during soil mixing operations. We have decades of soil mixing experience and numerous qualified Soil Mixing Specialists but have not encountered one that is a PE in a full-time, on-site role. As this is atypical for soil mixing, can the requirement for a PE be removed for the Soil Mixing Specialist or can the PE be an off-site, part-time advisory position?

See the answer to question #1.

24.

-3.4.2.3 b) ii

Specification 02 55 00 - Paragraph

1.4.A.2

Page #19

The RFP indicates that the Soil Mixing Specialist must be a professional Engineer licensed in the State of Florida. Very few qualified Soil Mixing Specialists have a PE and are registered in the State of Florida.

Additionally, limiting the soil mixing specialist to those only licensed in Florida seems to preclude the Department from utilizing significant talent and experience in this field from outside the State that would benefit the project. Can the requirement for a PE be removed from the Soil Mixing Specialist if they can demonstrate significant soil mixing experience or in the alternative, allow the Soil Mixing Specialist to be a PE licensed in other States?

See the answer to question #1.

25.

3.4.2.3 a

3.4.2.4 1i

3.4.2.4 3

The RFP indicates the Soil Mixing Specialist will not be assigned dual functions. As part of the Quality Assurance Plan, the Sampling Team needs to be identified along with the tests and procedures to be used to demonstrate ISS performance criteria are met.

The Soil Mixing Specialist would be a valuable asset to the Sampling Team. Would having the Soil Mixing specialist as part of the Sampling Teams conflict with their not being assigned dual functions?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 3.4.2.3 b ii.

26. Form D – Rate Schedule – Bid Items 20.3, 20.4, 24.1 and 24.2

Bid Items 20.3, 20.4, 24.1 and 24.2 are Listed under Section 22 Subtitle C Disposal. For Bid purposes, what are the hazardous waste codes for these bid items?

Soil and sludge have the potential to be classified as a

Addendum No. 2 Page 7 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) characteristic waste. This potential is based prior Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) analysis for lead and actual concentrations of lead in sludge.

For this RFP, waste code D008 shall be used when providing items under Form D – Rate Schedule that are potentially hazardous.

The selected RA Contractor will submit a Transportation and Off-Site Disposal Plan, see Section 01 36 00 of the DTS.

Information on waste characterization for this site is available, but may not be limited to, the Feasibility Study Report, Revision 3, dated June 4, 2019.

General Site Files are available on the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2.

27.

02 72 00 4

Discharge to be assumed during the bid is 10 gallons per minute at the injection well, but the treatment system is capable of treating 100 gallons per minute.

Also, in paragraph D it states that the contractor is to provide a construction water discharge of 100 GPM.

Should the assumed discharge be 100 GPM and not 10

GPM?

The primary purpose of the water treatment system is to treat construction stormwater during remedial activities; it is not anticipated that dewatering for soil excavation will be required. The Contractor has the option to discharge treated water to the storm sewer and/or an injection well and it is the responsibility of the Contractor to secure permits for the discharge of treated water. It is anticipated that treatment flow rates will be approximately 10 gallons/per minute, but the remediation system should have the capacity, if needed, for up to 100 gpm.

Permitting discharge of treated water, whether to sewer and/or injection wells, will be the responsibility of the selected RA Contractor, see Section 02 72 00, part 3 of the DTS.

The design of the construction water treatment and disposal system will be provided in the Construction Water Management Plan that will be reviewed and approved by DEP and EPA.

28. - Attachment 1 Section 7

(b) Invoice Reduction Page #2 of 13

If Contractor does not meet a deadline for any deliverable, the Department will reduce the invoice amount by 1% for each day the deadline is missed, Addendum No. 2 Page 8 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer unless an extension is approved in writing by the Department.

It’s not entirely clear how this would be calculated, and whether it would be 1% off of the total task price, or just the latest invoice following the expected completion date.

Please see the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.5 a.

The reduction would be on the latest invoice following the expected completion date.

29.

RFP Section 4.5 (a) Page 30 of 35

“Pursuant to section 287.058(1)(h), F.S., and in addition to any other remedies available according to this Contract, if a Deliverable identified in this SOW is not completed and submitted to the satisfaction of the Department by the close of business on the date the Deliverable is due, the compensation amount stated for that portion of the work shall be reduced by 0.5% per week for each week the Deliverable is late, with the total amount not to exceed the total compensation amount for the Deliverable.”

Attachment 1 Section 7 (b) Invoice Reduction – states invoice amount will reduce by 1% for each day the deadline is missed.

These 2 requirements are conflicting. Please clarify which requirement will apply – whether 0.5% per week or 1% per day? Also, is this considered as liquidated damages?

Please see the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.5 a.

See Paragraph #3 of Attachment 2 of the Draft Contract regarding liquidated damages.

30.

-Drawings – Drawings R-010 and D-

Drawing R-010 has an area shown are Concrete Pavement. Drawing D-001 has concrete details.

However, the bid form does not have a Bid Item for concrete. What are the expected areas for concrete replacement, and can a bid item be added to Form D – Rate Schedule?

The concrete replacement was included as part of a proposed shallow soil excavation beneath 31st Avenue

Addendum No. 2 Page 9 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

(Drawing R-001 and R-004). This soil excavation (along 31st Ave) has been removed from the final scope of work. All costs for the LDA ISS column wall (including but not limited to installing the LDA wall, concrete pavement removal and replacement, utilities removal, temporary rerouting, and replacement etc.) must be included in the Form D - Rate Schedule, Item #10.4.

31.

General -

Can you confirm that our price is to be based on implementing the work per the Drawings and Specifications provided by FDEP as the basis of bid and that the contractor could be compensated via a change order if there are any material changes in the final design?

The pricing for this RFP shall be included in Form D – Rate Schedule.

At this time, there are no provisions for material changes in either the solicitation or the draft contract. The Department may consider changes related to unforeseeable and material circumstances.

32.

Drawing D002 and Form D – Rate Schedule – Bid

Form

Detail 3 on Sheet D-002 shows Compacted Local Fill.

Does this refer to imported fill?

If imported fill is required, then which line item should be used for invoicing - providing and placement of import fill material?

Imported clean fill shall be used for the backfill scope of work in accordance with Section 31 05 05 of the DTS. See Form D - Rate Schedule, Item #12.4.

33.

RFP Form C Page #46 of

In the case of the Respondent submitting as a Joint Venture (JV), can you please confirm that the independent experience of each of the JV members is acceptable to meet the client reference requirements within the RFP?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 3.4.1.2, and Addendum No. 2 - Revised - Form A – Business Response Form.

34.

RFP 3.4.1.2 Tab B Required Forms -

Can you confirm that in the case of a Respondent submitting as a Joint Venture (JV), only three (3) Form C client reference forms are to be submitted (and not three (3) for each JV member)?

See the answer to question #33.

35. General 2.3.2.1

Page 8 of RFP Can the FDEP allow a timeline for a second round of questions following the responses to the first round of

Addendum No. 2 Page 10 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer questions, in case the responses precipitate additional clarification needed?

No.

36.

General -

Is all sludge removed?

No. See Section 31 23 00 of the DTS, for discussion on free-product/light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) removal. The term “sludge” has been used to characterize the contamination at this site. From the Record of Decision “The contaminated media at the Site includes non-aqueous phase liquid (NAPL) and sludge-impacted soil from past facility processes…” The operable units (OU1 and OU2), include soil and groundwater impacted by NAPL or free product, and soil and groundwater impacted by oil/sludge.

General Site Files are available on the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2.

37.

General -

Is there an asbestos report?

See the answer to question #12.

38.

General -

If no asbestos report was provided, would it be considered a change order if the contractor performs an asbestos survey and identifies the presence of asbestos?

See the answer to question #12.

39.

General -

Does sod have to be installed upon completion?

The majority of the site will be restored using asphalt or concrete. There is an area in the southeast corner that has “vegetative cover” it is anticipated that this area will require seed as indicated on the Form D - Rate Schedule, Item #12.7.

See Drawing No. D-002 of the DTS. Typical Yard Section (Vegetative Cover).

40.

General -

Is this a progress payment project?

The Schedule for each phase of work and the associated deliverables will be specified within the Task Assignment issued by the Department.

Deliverables will be reviewed by DEP and EPA to confirm that work was performed in accordance with the approved RA Work Plan and Form D - Rate Schedule.

41.

General -

What is the anticipated timeline for removal of existing tenants and commencement of site work?

The property owner will be responsible for ensuring the tenants have vacated the property. DEP will provide

Addendum No. 2 Page 11 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer the property owner with an updated timeline once the RA Contractor is selected. The property owner will have a minimum of 90-days notification to remove tenants from the site.

42.

General -

Can the Response Due Date be extended to allow more time for pricing evaluation and sufficient time after receiving answers to questions?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.8.

43.

RFP Section 6.3 -

Can you please confirm that Form E is not required to be submitted with the response and will only be requested in the event of a “tie”?

Yes, confirmed.

44.

Attachment 1-Draft Contract

Page 25 of the PDF

Technical Specification – Division 01 – General Requirements – It seems like Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work (FDEP to Develop) and Section 01 78 39 Project Record Documents (FDEP to Develop) are missing. Can you please provide Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work and Section 01 78 39 Project Record Documents?

The 100% Design Memo dated 11-17-2023 is available in the site file through DEP’s Information Portal. This document provides a general summary of work and includes an overview of the remedial activities to be performed in accordance with the DTS.

The project record documents are all the site file documents provided through the DEP’s Information Portal. These files are provided as information only.

General Site Files are available on the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2.

45.

RFP Section 2.2 Page 8 of the

RFP

Can you confirm that Vendors who provide FDEP as Consultant Oversight teams within the Petroleum Program and/or funded through the Inland Protection Trust Fund are eligible to propose on the project?

See the answer to question #9.

46.

General -

Will the Department furnish electronic copies of the 100% Final Design drawings and Technical Specifications in their native formats for use in the proposal submittals?

Yes. Once the RA Contractor is selected, DEP will provide electronic copies of the DTS in their native formats.

Addendum No. 2 Page 12 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

47.

General -

Can the Department define “damages” and “extent” in respect to existing public roads that the Contractor will be responsible for repairs?

The Department is unable to define these terms.

48.

31 23 00 7

What is the duration anticipated for the review and approval from FDEP for ISS?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.4.

49.

01 71 23 5

This section states that the contractor survey for layout be an PLS registered in the State of Florida. Can the surveyor performing layout and construction staking on a daily basis not be a PLS but all recorded information be performed by a PLS?

No. Final surveys shall be conducted and recorded by a Florida Professional Land Surveyor (PLS).

50.

1.3 5

If the contract is a five-year obligation with a potential renewal, is the expectation for the bond to be in place for the entire length of the contract?

Yes. See paragraph #2 of Attachment 2, Special Terms and Conditions of the Draft Contract.

51.

01 14 00-1

26 of Attachment 1

Can the contractor expect that FDEP will reasonably provide approval for "extra" work hours (Saturday Work)?

The Contractor must obtain prior written approval from DEP before work is scheduled to be performed beyond the regular work hours.

52.

Form D Item 5

Are there any items underground that need to be excavated besides footers related to the buildings to be demolished?

Site investigation data indicates that buried debris may be present within “historic fill” areas. Information on debris located within surficial fill/historic fill areas is available, but not limited to, the Pre-Design Investigation Data Report (OU-1/OU-2) dated March 7, 2023, and the Remedial Design/Pre-Design Investigation Work Plan (OU-1/OU-2) DRAFT dated October 28, 2022.

General Site Files are available on the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2.

53.

Plans-D-002 -

In what Bid Item will the installation of the Geomembrane Pipe Boot and Monitoring Well be measured and paid?

Addendum No. 2 Page 13 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

The Pipe Boot Detail cost shall be included in Form – D, Rate Schedule, Item #12.9. There will be no installation of a new monitoring well under this Contract.

54.

Specification 02 41 16 – Paragraph

1.6.A.1

The qualifications for the Hazardous Materials Specialist require several credentials, including being a Professional Structural Engineer licensed in the State of Florida. Can the PE requirements be removed for this position?

Pursuant to this specification, any structural inspection must, if required, be performed by a Professional Structural Engineer, licensed in the State of Florida.

55.

Specification 02 41 16 – Paragraph

1.6.A.1

Can you please confirm that the Respondent can propose multiple Hazardous Materials Specialists to cover the different qualifications required by the Specifications. For example, one Hazardous Material Specialist for the Asbestos and a different Hazardous Material Specialist for Lead or other Hazardous Materials (1.6.A.1c) requirements? Or does one individual need to cover all the qualifications?

Pursuant to this specification, the qualifications may be met by more than one specialist.

56.

Form D – Rate Schedule - Sections 5, 20, 21, and 22

Is the intent for demolition in the base bid to exclude items that have contingency bid items such as asbestos, lead, and RCRA abatement and disposal and that those items (if encountered) would be paid under the contingency bid items?

Yes. The contingency rates would be used for those items (if encountered) during the demolition.

57.

Specification 02 41 16 – Paragraph 1.7

Can you provide information regarding any asbestos, lead paint, other hazardous materials, universal waste (such as paints, oily material, etc.), items with refrigerant, and any other materials of concern in each of the buildings to be demolished?

See the answer to question #12.

58.

Form D – Rate Schedule and

Specification 02 41 16

Which bid line item do you want bidder to use for handling and disposal of various universal wastes (such as PCB ballasts, paint waste, used oil, etc.)

encountered during demolition of buildings?

See Item #22.1, Form D - Rate Schedule.

59. Specification 01 36 00 – Paragraph

1.4.A.3.e and f

What level of quality control will be required for the collection and analysis of environmental samples from the water treatment system?

Addendum No. 2 Page 14 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

Procedures for collecting all field samples must be included in the Field Sampling Plan (FSP). Quality control collection and testing will be included in the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) that will be included in the RA Work Plan. The RA Work plan will be reviewed and approved by DEP and EPA.

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.3 (a) (1) (a).

60. Specification 02 61 15 – Paragraph

3.2.B

What level of quality control will be required for the collection and testing of excavated soil samples?

See the answer to question #59.

61. Specification 01 36 00 – Paragraph

1.4.A.3.e and f

Will analytical data validation be required for the water samples collected from the water treatment system?

Yes. See the answer to question #59.

62.

General -

Following completion of the ISS and soil excavation activities, will post remediation monitoring be required and who will be responsible for the effort?

Quality Assurance (QA) testing and verification will be required to ensure that the remedial objectives for the OU1 and OU2 remedy have been met.

QA testing and sample verification will be defined within the Contractor Quality Control Plan and required as deliverables for ISS treatment Services.

63.

General -

Will the prime contractor be required to maintain a general contractor’s license?

Although a general contractor’s license is not separately required by the RFP, the Contractor will be required to comply with all local, state, and federal requirements which could require a general contractor’s license.

64.

9/21/2023 Meeting Summary

Has the FDOT indicated that the storm water discharge permit will be acceptable during construction?

Initial discussion between DEP and the FDOT during the remedial design indicated that FDOT would accept treated construction water during the remediation project.

65.

General –

General Site File link

The General Site File link provided in the RFP contains multiple iterations of documents associated with design drawings, design technical specifications and IC Plan. A review of the various iterations of these documents indicate they conflict with each other in some circumstances. Similarly, the FDEP comments

Addendum No. 2 Page 15 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer and/or Geosyntec comments documents also are contradictory to the design drawings, design technical specifications and IC Plan. Please confirm respondents shall use the design documents provided in the General Site File link that are dated 1/25/2024 as the basis of their bid and response.

The Respondents shall use the DTS provided as Attachment 9 of the Draft Contract. These are the documents that must be used for responding to the solicitation and can be accessed through the MyFloridaMarketPlace, Vendor Information Portal.

66.

General – Record of Decision (July, 2021) Part 2

Sec. 13.2.2

The ROD states “another advantage of in-situ stabilization / solidification is the ability of LDAs to penetrate, mix and treat the upper layers of limestone where residual NAPL is trapped.” Based on this position, stated by the USEPA in the ROD, please confirm the Contractor, for the purposes of bidding, shall assume the limestone will not preclude or impede the Contractor from reaching the RA target depths.

Based on the lithology and information provided in site investigation documents, including but not limited to, the Feasibility Study Report, Revision 3 dated June 4, 2019, it is anticipated that the limestone will not preclude or impede the Contractor from reaching the RA target depths.

General Site Files are available on the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2.

67.

General – Record of Decision (July, 2021) Part 2

Sec. 5.5.2

The ROD acknowledges the presence of PCBs at “very low levels”. Please confirm that for the purposes of bidding, respondents should assume that any and all investigative derived wastes (IDW) and or construction related waste will not require TSCA disposal and or management.

Based on historical data, PCB concentrations have been considerably below TSCA levels; therefore, for purposes of this RFP, respondents should assume related waste will not require TSCA disposal or management.

68.

General –

Record of Decision (July, 2021) Part 2

Sec. 5.5.1

The ROD acknowledges that “…due to elevated levels some of the sludge and NAPL maybe considered a RCRA characteristic waste due to toxicity 40 CFR 261.24.” Please confirm for the purposes of bidding, the sludge and NAPL are not considered as listed wastes under RCRA.

Addendum No. 2 Page 16 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

See the answer to question #26.

69.

Form D Item 4.2

Please provide details on Underground Injection System Information on the underground injection well is available, but may not be limited to, the As-Builts document dated July 17, 1995.

General Site Files are available on the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.2.

70.

General -

Will all existing mailboxes be relocated by others prior to Contractor’s mobilization?

The property owner shall be responsible for moving mailboxes and coordination with USPS on such movement prior to the start of construction.

71.

General -

Can details be provided on any office space or trailers the contractor must provide for FDEP, their Engineers, and/or other agencies?

It is not anticipated that there will be building space available for the selected RA Contractor to work out of.

The selected RA Contractor will not be required to provide a space for EPA, DEP, or their Engineers, or other Agencies. See Form D – Rate Schedule, Item #3.1.

72.

Pre-proposal meeting discussion -

It was mentioned on the pre-proposal call that there would be a revised set of drawings issued. Is that the case and when can the proposers expect to see those drawings?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.3 (a) (1) (d).

73.

Form D – Rate Schedule –

Bid Items 5.1 through 5.9

These are lump sum items. Is the cost for transportation and disposal (T&D) of debris to be included in Bid Item 11.1.1 or should T&D for building demolition be included in Bid Items 5.1 through 5.7?

The T&D for building demolition shall be included in Items #5.1 through #5.7. Item #11.1.1 shall include the T&D for the concrete foundations removed as part of Item # 8.1.

74.

General -

A review of the documents provided in the General Site Files link provided in the RFP confirms that FDEP shall be the Generator for any and all waste materials including Building Demolition waste materials. Please confirm FDEP shall be the Generator for any and all waste materials including Building Demolition waste materials.

Additionally, please confirm FDEP (or its agent, exclusive of the Contractor selected through this RFP)

Addendum No. 2 Page 17 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer shall act as generator for all wastes and sign and maintain all Manifests and Bills of Lading?

DEP will be the generator for the RA work on this site.

The selected RA Contractor will sign the waste manifests as an agent of the DEP.

75.

Form D – Rate

Schedule

Bid Items 20.1, 20.2 20.3, 20.4, 21.1. and 21.2 are Abatement in nature. Do these items include the site work AND disposal?

Yes.

76.

Form D – Rate Schedule

Bid Items 20.1, 20.2 20.3, 20.4, 21.1. and 21.2 are Abatement in nature. If disposal is to be included within Line Items, for bidding purposes, how are the wastes to be classified and what are the waste codes?

See the answer to question #26.

77.

General -

Can Lump Sum deliverables be paid on a mutually agreed upon percentage of completion, whether it be on time/schedule? What is the milestone payment schedule for mobilization when mobilization activities of subcontractors occur over the course of the project See the answer to question #40.

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 4.3 (a) (2).

78.

RFP Section 3.4.1.2 Page 17 of 52

It states “The client contact information for all three (3) Client Reference Forms must not be the same entity.

One (1) client contact must be different and not associated with the same company as the other two (2) client contacts listed on each Client Reference Form.

Please confirm respondent is allowed to use the same client contact for 2 of the 3 clients refence form.

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 3.4.1.2.

79.

NA NA

May we move the proposal submittal date to May 5, 2026 (a three-week extension)?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 1.8, Timeline of Events.

80.

4.3.1.d 22

Recertification of construction drawings and specifications. Will FDEP provide original AutoCAD and Word DOC files for the previously prepared design drawings and specifications for purpose of review, and any required updates/revisions, to support the recertification?

See the answer to question #46.

Addendum No. 2 Page 18 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

81.

3.4.2.4 19

Tab D: Quality Assurance Plan. The RFP indicates that respondents shall provide a Quality Assurance Plan as part of the proposal response. The RFP scope of work (Section 4.3) also specifies that a Quality Assurance Project Plan will be prepared for inclusion with the RA Work Plan Deliverable. Can you please clarify expectations for the proposal response? Is the requested Quality Assurance Plan for the proposal evaluation meant to be project specific to the RA scope of work, or is FDEP expecting us to provide a sample or example QAPP with the proposal that's indicative of the scope of work? Are you asking everyone to prepare and include the same QAPP that will be developed/required for the RA Work Plan as part of the proposal response?

See the attached Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010, Section 3.4.2.4.

82.

4.4 30

Department's Responsibilities: This section of the RFP indicates "The deliverables and invoice schedule will be specified within any Task Assignment (TA) issued by the Department. The TA will establish the invoice schedule and deliverable requirements for documentation of completed work and payment."

Please clarify the FDEP payment expectations for the work, for example:

Will FDEP prepare separate Task Assignments for each of the Deliverables defined in Section 4.3, or will it be a single Task Assignment inclusive of all deliverables?

Following award, will FDEP expect that the selected contractor prepares Task Assignment proposals detailing proposed work schedule and any schedule and payment milestones for each of these Deliverables? Can the schedule we outline in the RA Work Plan be used to inform milestone invoice and progress payment schedules for each of the Task Assignment deliverables? Will FDEP allow for multiple invoices and progress related payments for the individual deliverables defined in Section 4.3 of the

RFP?

See the answer to question #40.

83.

4.3.1.a.iii. 22

RA Work Plan, Pre-construction Services. Have building surveys for hazardous materials (i.e., asbestos, lead-based paint, etc.) been performed? Should we assume such survey/inspection will be required as a pre-construction service to inform the preparation of the Building Demolition and Removal Plan?

Addendum No. 2 Page 19 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

See the answer to question #12.

84.

4.3.1.a.xi. 23

RA Work Plan, QAPP. The technical specifications 01 36 00 indicate that the QAPP prepared for the RA Work Plan shall be prepared in accordance with USEPA guidance, and references QA/G-5 (Dec. 2002). USEPA has updated their QAPP guidance since these specifications were prepared. Can you please confirm we should reference the 2025 EPA guidance?

Yes. Use the updated EPA Quality Assurance Project Plan Guidance, dated October 1, 2025.

85.

3.4.1.2 17

Client Reference Forms. For respondents that form a Joint-Venture in support of this contract, will you accept client and project references from either/both of the JV partners, or do these references all have to be from projects that were performed by the Licensed Engineering firm?

See the answer to question #10 and question #33.

86.

3.4.2.3 18

Tab C: Qualifications and Experience of Key Personnel.

The RFP indicates that the Soil Mixing Specialist shall be a Professional Engineer Licensed in the State of Florida. During the previous solicitation, FDEP clarified that the Soil Mixing Specialist does not need to be a PE, but the specialist should have significant soil mixing experience demonstrated in the response and certification of proposed ISS mixes and certified performance stabilization reports shall be signed off by the RA Project/Professional. Can you confirm what the PE licensure requirements are for the Soil Mixing Specialist?

See the answer to question #1.

87.

4.3.4 24

Construction Water Management: Please confirm the design basis assumptions bidders should use for construction water management, including anticipated vs maximum flows, discharge routing options (storm sewer vs injection well), and any constraints DEP expects bidders to assume.

See the answer to question #27.

88.

4.3.4 24

Construction Water Management: Please provide any updated information since the prior solicitation regarding the existing injection well (as-builts, capacity, permit status, usability) and confirm whether bidders should assume the contractor must obtain/renew all required injection well permits.

See the answer to question #27 and #69.

Addendum No. 2 Page 20 of 21

Question Number

Solicitation Section

Solicitation Page Number Question / Answer

89.

4.3.5 24

Building Demolition Services: Please confirm the current status and anticipated timeline for tenant vacancy and the assumptions bidders should use for demolition start/access, including any required coordination steps prior to mobilization.

See the answer to question #41.

90.

4.3.5 24

Building Demolition Services: Please confirm whether any updated asbestos/lead/hazmat surveys are available; if not, confirm that discovery and handling of these materials will be addressed solely through the contingency bid items and the associated plans required in the RA Work Plan.

See the answer to question #12.

91.

4.3.11 25

Transportation and Disposal Services: Please confirm the waste characterization assumptions bidders should use for pricing, including applicable RCRA waste codes (for Subtitle C) and any limitations/expectations for Subtitle D vs Subtitle C disposal under the scope.

See the answer to question #26.

92.

4.3.3 24

Temporary Facilities and Controls: provide the basis of design for erosion and sediment controls (locations, minimum measures, drawings/spec references). If locations are not provided, confirm how DEP will evaluate bidder completeness and what minimum assumptions bidders should use.

See Form D - Rate Schedule, Items #3.2 and 3.3.

See Section 02 55 00, 31 23 00, and 02 72 00 of the

DTS.

93.

4.5 30

Enforcement: There is liquidated damages of 1% per day off of the invoice for any deliverable that is missed. It’s not entirely clear how this would be calculated, and whether it would be 1% off of the total task price, or just the latest invoice following the expected completion date. Please clarify.

See the answer to question #28.

– Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank –

Addendum No. 2 Page 21 of 21

The following document has been attached within:

• Attendance Report Pre-Response Conference RFP 2026010

In accordance with Section 2.6, Addenda/Amendments to the RFP, the Department hereby formally amends the following documents listed below. Revisions are indicated in blue with strikethrough for deletions and underlines for additions.

The following document(s) have been revised and attached separately within the Vendor Information Portal:

• Addendum No. 2 – Revised RFP 2026010 o Addendum No. 2 – Revised Form A – Business Response Form (Attached within “Addendum No. 2 –

Revised RFP 2026010 & begins on PDF page 43)

– Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank –

1. Summary Meeting title Mandatory Pre-Response Conference for RFP 2026010 - Re-Ad PPC Superfund Site RAS Attended participants 61 Start time 3/05/26, 9:01:08 AM End time 3/05/26, 10:27:09 AM Meeting duration 1h 26m 1s Average attendance time 52m 44s

2. Participants Name First Join Last Leave In-Meeting Duration Email Participant ID (UPN) Role Flanagan, Sabina J 3/05/26, 9:19:08 AM 3/05/26, 10:27:09 AM 1h 8m Sabina.Flanagan@FloridaDEP.gov Sabina.Flanagan@FloridaDEP.gov Organizer Fowler, Karlee 3/05/26, 9:15:54 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:16 AM 1h 2m 33s Karlee.Fowler@FloridaDEP.gov Karlee.Fowler@FloridaDEP.gov Presenter Joseph L. Applegate 3/05/26, 9:20:12 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:15 AM 1h 4m 2s JApplegate@Geosyntec.com JApplegate@geosyntec.com Presenter David Chuslo (Unverified) 3/05/26, 9:20:13 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:20 AM 1h 4m 6s Presenter Marilyn Hadidian 3/05/26, 9:20:14 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:14 AM 1h 4m mhadidian@gftinc.com mhadidian@gftinc.com Presenter Buffington, Bethany 3/05/26, 9:21:14 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:24 AM 1h 3m 10s Bethany.Buffington@FloridaDEP.gov Bethany.Buffington@FloridaDEP.gov Presenter Farrell, Jennifer A. 3/05/26, 9:21:31 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:14 AM 1h 2m 42s Jennifer.A.Farrell@FloridaDEP.gov Jennifer.A.Farrell@FloridaDEP.gov Presenter Schaefer, Geoffrey 3/05/26, 9:21:37 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:19 AM 1h 2m 41s geoff.schaefer@wsp.com geoff.schaefer@wsp.com Presenter Stenger, David 3/05/26, 9:22:57 AM 3/05/26, 10:25:28 AM 1h 2m 31s David.Stenger@transash.com David.Stenger@transash.com Presenter Darji, Mubeen 3/05/26, 9:23:05 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:15 AM 1h 1m 10s Mubeen.Darji@FloridaDEP.gov Mubeen.Darji@FloridaDEP.gov Presenter Scott, Bruce 3/05/26, 9:23:07 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:51 AM 10m 14s bscott@northstar.com BScott@northstar.COM Presenter Grace, Bryan 3/05/26, 9:23:35 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:02 AM 1h 26s Bryan.Grace@tetratech.com BRYAN.GRACE@tetratech.com Presenter Zeller, Craig 3/05/26, 9:24:45 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:14 AM 59m 29s Zeller.Craig@epa.gov Zeller.Craig@epa.gov Presenter 19048382971 (Unverified) 3/05/26, 9:24:51 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:43 AM 58m 51s Attendee Kevin Corradino 3/05/26, 9:25:07 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:41 AM 59m 34s kcorradino@cascade-env.com kcorradino@cascade-env.com Presenter Hiren Shah 3/05/26, 9:25:29 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:12 AM 58m 43s hiren.shah@actn.com hiren.shah@actn.com Presenter Luke Frantz 3/05/26, 9:26:21 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:15 AM 57m 53s luke.frantz@actn.com luke.frantz@actn.com Presenter James Liebl (Unverified) 3/05/26, 9:27:06 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:17 AM 57m 11s Presenter Galler, John 3/05/26, 9:27:19 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:48 AM 56m 29s john.galler@tetratech.com john.galler@tetratech.com Presenter Marc Syracuse 3/05/26, 9:27:20 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:10 AM 56m 50s marc.syracuse@actn.com marc.syracuse@actn.com Presenter Kevin Dyson 3/05/26, 9:27:32 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:50 AM 56m 17s kdyson@phillipsinc.com kdyson@phillipsinc.com Presenter Lowery, Christina 3/05/26, 9:27:42 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:15 AM 56m 33s Christina.Lowery@FloridaDEP.gov Christina.Lowery@FloridaDEP.gov Presenter Brown, Jeffrey 3/05/26, 9:27:59 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:45 AM 55m 45s brown.jeffrey@cleanharbors.com brown.jeffrey@cleanharbors.com Presenter Adrian Gill 3/05/26, 9:28:01 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:18 AM 56m 17s agill@posillicoinc.com agill@posillicoinc.com Presenter Dean Racioppi 3/05/26, 9:28:19 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:08 AM 55m 49s DRacioppi@odinenv.com DRacioppi@odinenv.com Presenter Jason Marberry 3/05/26, 9:28:24 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:16 AM 55m 52s jason.marberry@actn.com jason.marberry@actn.com Presenter Hagaman, Janette 3/05/26, 9:28:40 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:43 AM 55m 2s Janette.Hagaman@tetratech.com Janette.Hagaman@tetratech.com Presenter Danielle Thompson 3/05/26, 9:28:45 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:10 AM 55m 25s dthompson@posillicoinc.com dmendoza@posillicoinc.com Presenter Brian Moore 3/05/26, 9:29:00 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:49 AM 54m 48s Brian.Moore@ghd.com Brian.Moore@ghd.com Presenter Daniel Fisher 3/05/26, 9:29:04 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:13 AM 55m 8s dfisher@crawfordenvironmental.com dfisher@crawfordenvironmental.com Presenter Michael Hill 3/05/26, 9:29:05 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:36 AM 55m 30s mike@copefla.com mike@copefla.com Presenter 17706536312 (Unverified) 3/05/26, 9:29:10 AM 3/05/26, 9:44:14 AM 15m 4s Attendee Fred Maier 3/05/26, 9:29:24 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:46 AM 54m 22s fmaier@trifectainc.com fmaier@trifectainc.com Presenter Guy Kaminski 3/05/26, 9:29:26 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:13 AM 54m 47s Guy.Kaminski@ghd.com Guy.Kaminski@ghd.com Presenter Marc Eichenholtz 3/05/26, 9:29:34 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:31 AM 54m 57s meichenholtz@mas-env.com MEichenholtz@usanova.com Presenter Paul Lear 3/05/26, 9:29:35 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:43 AM 54m 7s plear@cascade-env.com plear@cascade-env.com Presenter Hanks, Stephen 3/05/26, 9:29:46 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:19 AM 54m 32s stephen.hanks@wsp.com stephen.hanks@wsp.com Presenter Bob Moody 3/05/26, 9:29:48 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:16 AM 54m 27s bob.moody@actn.com bob.moody@actn.com Presenter Kevin M. Warner 3/05/26, 9:29:53 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:12 AM 54m 18s KWarner@Geosyntec.com KWarner@geosyntec.com Presenter Stephen Bentsen 3/05/26, 9:29:57 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:25 AM 54m 28s sbentsen@integral-corp.com sbentsen@integral-corp.com Presenter Seth Gilbert 3/05/26, 9:29:58 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:08 AM 54m 10s sgilbert@trifectainc.com sgilbert@trifectainc.com Presenter Julianna Campbell 3/05/26, 9:30:02 AM 3/05/26, 10:24:08 AM 54m 6s Julianna.Campbell@ghd.com Julianna.Campbell@ghd.com Presenter Alex Gomez 3/05/26, 9:30:04 AM 3/05/26, 10:23:49 AM 53m 45s agomez@posillicoinc.com agomez@posillicoinc.com Presenter Hirten, Joshua J.