Culvert 10_RFQ QA_1_20230712.pdf

1) The second paragraph of the second page of the SOW states: "The contractor will prepare an administrative draft, second draft, after that as many drafts that are needed to address all comments, final draft (for public circulation), and final EA. EA preparation shall be in accordance with 40 CFR Parts 1500 – 1508."

That's very open ended. Does the AF anticipate that more than two administrative drafts of the EA would be required before a Final Draft for public comment is ready?

Response 1: Our review of the first administrative draft will the very thorough. If the contractor adequately addresses all comments provided, then we would anticipate only an administrative and second draft being required. If the comments are not adequately addressed, then we will require that additional drafts be prepared until the information is correct. Number of drafts is dependent on quality of work and comment responses.

2) Same page, same paragraph of the SOW states: "The contractor shall plan project activities, including the development, implementation, and maintenance of project schedules, status of resources, report(s) on the activities, and progress toward accomplishing DAF compliance with the NEPA."

Are these post NEPA activities, e.g. are these activities that would take place after the FONSI is signed, e.g. compliances with terms and conditions in the BO during construction?

Response 2: No. This is only referring to NEPA activities, with the last item tracked being the signed

FONSI.

3) Can you provide a copy of the "30 CES/CEIEA’s most current version of the “Style Guide and Standards for Writing Environmental Assessments.”

Response 3: See attached ‘Standard Air Force EA and EIS Format_Jan 22’ and ‘Tongue & Quill’ and we have provided the last culvert EA completed at VSFB as an example (Honda Culverts). “Style Guide and Standards for Writing Environmental Assessments” has been replaced by these documents.

4) Page 3 discusses analysis of alternatives and goes into detail about developing a range of alternatives.

However the third paragraph of Page 2 states "As a finding contained in the draft FONSI, a Finding of No Practicable Alternative (FONPA) shall be prepared since the Proposed Action will occur within the 100-year floodplain. The FONPA must discuss why no other practicable alternative exists to avoid impacts."

This seems inconsistent, why would we analyze a range of alternatives if you have already determined there is only one viable action alternative?

Response 4: There is no practicable alternative to impacting the floodplain because this is a drainage feature. There could be alternatives to how the culvert is designed and/or methods that need to be discussed as alternatives. Alternatives must be included in the EA regardless of the FONPA requirement.

5) Page 5 of the following states:

• Submit news release in the Lompoc Record and the Santa Maria Times for three days each, including one Sunday.

• Distribute EA and FONSI/FONPA to libraries, individuals, and agencies as directed by the 30 CES/CEIEA Environmental Planner.

• 30 CES/CEIEA shall review public comments.

Are we paying for the publications or will the AF do that?

Is it acceptable to mail the public review EAs to the 21 libraries, individuals and agencies or do they need to be hand delivered?

Will the AF be preparing responses to public comments and edits to the Final EA or is the contractor expected to do that.

Response 5:

Contractor will pay for publications and hardcopies.

Hardcopies, where required, can be mailed, but signature/confirmation of receipt must be acquired and included in the final EA. Many individuals and agencies on our distribution list only require emails (included distribution list as attachment, some changes to this list could occur between now and public comment period for this task).

The contractor is expected to draft response to public comments and the AF will review.