Questions_and_Answers_Low_Bay.pdf

LOW BAY OFFICE LIGHTING

EIELSON AFB, ALASKA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

FTQW 11-1502

Questions and Answers

Questions regarding building 2268

Q1. Some panels don’t match the drawings. Panel C is not where the drawings indicate.

A1. Panel C is located in the mechanical room on the exterior of the building.

Q2. There are no existing exit/emg fixtures. We are installing all new from what the drawings show.

There is no circuiting for this new wiring. Please clarify.

A2. New exit signs follow existing light locations. Assume quantity of lights for demolition commensurate with new work plan. Circuiting for emergency lighting systems shall follow code requirements where these systems to be fed to the lighting circuit which normally served the space and from an un-switched conductor. Contractor shall need to trace and verify these circuits as required to install these systems. .

Q3. Wiring from exit to remote heads shows no wiring information. Please provide.

A3. Wiring from the exit sign battery system to the remote heads utilizes low voltage wiring.

Follow manufacturer’s instructions.

Questions regarding building 3303

Q4. Since building 3303 is a child care facility, will construction on have to be completed during nights or weekends?

A4. Construction will need to be completed only on nights/weekends. Will need coordination with users to avoid work while children are in building.

Q5. There is a light in room 27 that does not appear on the demo list.

A5. That is correct. There is a light that will conflict with new lights that shall be removed.

Q6. The exterior Mechanical Room (room 24) light and panel layout do not match the drawings.

A6. That is correct. The panels should be on the wall immediately to one’s left upon entering the mechanical room. Additionally, the lights lined up perpendicular to the actual location of the panels.

Q7. Drawing E101 for Bldg. 3303 (sheet 14 of 19) of the provided drawing package is missing the F1-F6 and H indicators on the fixtures to be Demoed. Does the government have this information on an updated drawing that can be provided to determine the number of Fluorescent bulbs to be disposed of.

This is the only building for which the Demo drawing does not provide this information.

A7. Amendment 0002 provides revised drawings that include the missing indicators on fixtures to be demoed.

Q8. Building 3303 Demo Drawing has no indicators identifying the number or Tubes in current fixtures to be disposed of. Is this information available? If so, please provide for use in preparing the bid.

A8. Only the information included within the bid documents is available for use by the contractors. Additional information is not available. Where lighting fixtures are shown with numbers of lamps is to assist the contractor in developing a cost for disposal of the lamps, but was not intended to be a comprehensive quantity for all buildings.

Q9. 2 doors in Staff Lounge 17-18 into Sports Runway do not exist. Please confirm.

A9. Confirmed.

Q10. Existing switching shown on common wall to 14 and 17-18 are shown next to doors that are not there. New work shows one switch relocated to doors common to hallway. Are these moving and confirm 4 lighting zones into one zone.

A10. Switching and locations for systems shall be traced and verified by the contractor.

Locations for existing switches may differ from what is shown for the facility as locations were based on available as-built drawings. Contractor to provide switching where currently deployed on E201 and as-built drawings accordingly. Switching to be consolidated as this area does not require lighting zones.

Q11. Rooms that are shown to get dimming show no additional wiring needed. Please confirm that no new wiring is required and how this is to be achieved.

A11. Dimming shall be provided by the contractor and will be subject to the type of lighting control system they propose. Some lighting control and dimming systems are configured with low voltage cabling whereas other systems utilize CAT type cables and control modules and others utilize wireless connections. Where dimming is shown on the drawings the contractor shall provide this functionality and use their normal means and methods to achieve this functionality based on the control systems which they select to deploy at the site(s).

Questions regarding building 3343

Q12. Can you provide the gym floor protection procedures to all bidders? Typically each type of gym floor has specific procedures for protection/weight distribution. Scaffolding and man lifts will need to used in these areas.

A12. If rubber tires are used, please only use the matting provided by the facility, located in the basketball court area.

Q13. On building 3343, will the building personnel be able to remove and or move exercise machines, pool equipment and like items to enable access to the lighting?

A13. Yes, we will request that when the time comes for the submittal of the construction schedule that timelines for which rooms will be worked on be specified to coordinate with user to accomplish this.

Q14. What is the width between the rail and wall at the stairs that lead to the pool deck?

A14. Unknown at this time. However, Contractors will have to scaffold.

Q15. What is the height from the gym floor to the highest fixture?

A15. Approximately 40-50 feet.

Q16. Do the side doors to the gym area open to an area that can handle a scissor lift?

A16. Yes.

Q17. The demo drawings show panel J and circuits for gym lighting. The new drawings do not show a panel but what appears the same circuits. Is this wiring new or existing?

A17. The wiring for the gym lighting is new as indicated on the plan. The existing wiring should be removed as indicated on the demolition plans.

Q18. N1 fixture is new. Please provide wiring required.

A18. Fixture N1 is utilized within this gymnasium area to provide emergency lighting and is powered from a new inverter unit as this space required significant amounts of light to achieve compliant egress illumination levels. Inverter shall be connected to a circuit powering the gym lighting so interruption of this circuit power initiates this egress lighting. Lighting from these fixtures will not operate for normal conditions.

Q19. Where does the wiring from the 400w Inverter come from and what is required?

A19. Power for the inverter will be derived from a circuit serving the gymnasium space lighting.

As this inverter is only utilized for emergency lighting these connections will be to a circuit serving the gymnasium lighting and an un-switched circuit.

Q20. For bidding purposes and to clarify new and old, where are the panel schedules to verify work?

Please provide.

A20. Panel schedules are not provided within the design documents and the contractor will need to accommodate this in their bids. Contractor will need to provide within their bid costs associated with a trace and verification of the existing lighting circuits. The intent is these existing circuits will be utilized as the circuits to support the new lighting requires much less power than existing systems. Contractor shall also update the panel schedules for all circuits affected within the work per NEC requirements as part of the proposal.

Questions regarding building 1216

Q21. Since building 1216 is a Control Tower, will construction on have to be completed during nights or weekends?

A21. Due to the small amount of workspace and flights that occur during the day, we require work to be completed on nights/weekends. Control tower will be closed, but personnel will be located in building below in case of emergency.

Q22. Some of the lamps appear to be 4 bulb lamps instead of 2 as called for in the specifications and drawings. Is this common throughout the building?

A22. Contractor shall verify the number and types of lamps in the fixtures as part of their work for use in developing demolition costs within their bids.

Q23. At the site visit, one fixture that was open had 4-T8 lamps. The legend shows all are to be 2 lamp T-12. Please confirm.

A23. See response for A22.

Q24. E101, detail 11:

a. Existing switching is in a location at corner near stairs. Drawing show new switching along workstation panel. Can the switching remain at the current location?

b. Are new ceiling tiles required and are they to be painted black to match existing?

c. New H1 fixture in cab. What wiring is required? Need panel and circuit along with wiring needed.

A24. a. Switches may remain in current locations upon coordination with building users, refer to specific note 2 on sheet E201. Assume switches will be distributed to different workstations.

b. Reference answer to Question 36.

c. Coordinate switch location with users. Specific note 1 has additional information.

Contractor may utilize an existing circuit serving this space for on/off user maintenance purposes and emergency functions.

Q25. Are all H1 fixtures using an existing emergency circuit? If not what is needed?

A25. The existing lights in the stairway have EM functionality so an un-switched circuit conductor for these fixtures was likely used provide this functionality. Contractor shall verify this as the as-built drawings do not shown an additional un-switched conductor (only a neutral and hot shown) within the circuit feeding them. Provide a battery and an un-switched circuit conductor to all fixtures identified with this option.

Questions regarding building 3110

Q26. Will building 3110 have to be complete during non-standard work hours?

A26. Work will be completed during normal duty hours of 0730-1630 as the controlled areas will require an escort inside the room.

Q27. Will the lighting grid in Room 106B be removed?

A27. Yes, prior to work, we will anchor the HVAC systems so the removal of the grid will not disturb the existing HVAC.

Q28. Building 3110 room 111 is a battery room without ventilation and the existing lighting and switch are explosion proof. New lighting scheduled for installation is not explosion proof. Has this area been properly evaluated to insure new installation meets code?

A28. Room 111 of Building 3110 has been removed from the solicitation at this time. Further determinations must be made before any work can be completed. See JA-2 Additional Construction Documents and JA-3 Drawings.

Q29. What is required for Dust Control?

A29. The equipment located in Room 106 is extremely sensitive to construction dust - dust in general. As such, when construction is being accomplished near it, the equipment must be covered to minimize exposure to falling debris. Also, workers must ensure that any dust generated is keep to a minimum, which can be through the use of entrapment. When covering the equipment all precaution need to be taken to minimize ESD.

Q30. Type D Fixture installation method in 106a, b and c areas? Concrete anchor and cable?

A30. Cable mounted fixtures are acceptable.

Q31. Mechanical in grid is not designed to be supported without grid. How is this to be accomplished?

A31. Utilize supporting systems and cables associated for grid ceiling to support existing diffusers and modify diffuser as needed (drill holes in corners for example) to support in place.

Q32. Rm. 111. There are only 11 existing fixtures not the 14 shown. They are all Class 1 Div 1 but nothing else in the room has that classification. The proposed replacement fixture are not rated either.

Please clarify scope.

A32. Lighting in demo plan from as-built, but if only 11 are still remaining then demolish what is there. Install lights as shown on the E201 drawing. Classified location lighting is not currently required for this space, but may have been in the past when other systems were in this room.

General Questions

Q33. Is there a Hazardous waste disposal location on Eielson AFB that can be utilized?

A33. No, all hazardous waste must be disposed off-base.

Q34. Are there any lead based paint and asbestos reports available for any of the buildings?

A34. Yes, please see Vol 1 of Final Construction Documents that was provided for the locations tested and the results.

Q35. It looks like appendices G, H & I to Section 011400 were missing from the contract documents for this project.

A35. Appendix I: https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/content/forms.jsp; Appendix H: See the attached “Generic SAP”; Appendix I: See the attached “Hazardous and Universal Waste Procedure Letters 19 Jul 2016.” All documents are included in JA-2 Specifications.

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/content/forms.jsp

Q36. Many of the ceiling tiles involved in this project are past their usable life and will suffer extensive damage from removing and reinstalling. To what extent do we replace tiles and how much damage is acceptable?

A36. If in the course of installation any ceiling tiles that are broken and showing visible damage from 5 feet away and/or no longer sit properly must be replaced to match existing to the best of your abilities.

Q37. Due to the huge variety and age of ceiling tiles that may need replaced, it is possible that exact tiles are not available. Is this acceptable?

A37. This is acceptable. Please match existing as close as possible—the Government understands that some exact models may not be available any longer.

Q38. What is the course of action for areas such as building 1127 room 111a that have a ceiling grid beyond repair? a. Demo and replace grid? b. Demo grid and surface mount light fixtures?

A38. Contractor may demolish existing grids at their option or may provide additional supports to existing grid as needed to support new lights. New lights will be independently supported per specification 26 51 00.

Q39. Form 1442, 13.D. requires a 180day acceptance period. Can this be reduced to 60 or 90? Lighting quotes are rarely good past 60 days and at the rate LED technology is advancing, many fixtures types could be unavailable in 180 days.

A39. The Bid validity requirement will be reduced to 90 days.

Q40. The Solicitation mentions that conduit may need replacing in some areas. Are there identified areas that will require replacement or is this a generic statement for just in case purposes?

A40. Refer to general project note 4 on sheet E001.

Q41. Does Eielson AFB have a recycling program available for use by the contractor under this contract?

If so, please provide some detail.

A41. No, all hazardous waste must be disposed off-base.

Q42. Are all power panels depicted on the drawing considered available for re-use for new lighting circuits or do new power panels need to be considered?

A42. No new power panels are anticipated as the new LED lighting utilizes less power than existing for all cases.

Q43. As this solicitation appears to be for a lighting replacement and installation project and not a construction project, our question concerns the costly construction-related clauses with regard to bid, performance, and payment bonds. As this type of lighting upgrade is regularly contracted for without these construction-related bond requirements, we respectfully request that the solicitation be modified to remove the bond-related clauses incorporated by reference, and in particular the clause incorporated by full text, 52.228-1 BID GUARANTEE.

A43. In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation this project falls under the definition of a construction project. Therefore, in order to protect the government, we are legally required to include the aforementioned construction-related clauses in solicitations and contracts.

Q44. There are many fixtures that are shown on the Fixture Schedule and have descriptions. All Type A for example are shown as Troffer, drop in for suspended ceilings. However the same type is being used in different applications. In Building 2268 they are troffers but in 3343, they are surface mount to concrete. These are totally different fixtures at different prices and labor. This has happened to several types, please clarify.

A44. Refer to specification 26 51 00 3.1 A, and provide accessories such as trim kits, surface mount kits or other items needed to produce a complete installation. Some fixtures note in the Basis of Design section to provide surface mount kit where surface mounted.

Q45. There are emergency fixtures shown for most types on the drawings as new but not in the fixture schedule. Are these to have emergency ballasts? Are they connected to existing emergency circuits?

Please clarify requirements.

A45. Where fixtures require EM functionality, provide EM kit where required as shown on drawings.

/////Last Item///// i

ENVIRONMENTAL WORK PLAN

FOR PROJECTS WITH NO KNOWN

CONTAMINATION

Aug 5th, 2013

Prepared By:

United States Air Force Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

1.2 RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROJECT PERSONNEL

1.2.1 CEAN Responsibilities

1.2.2 CEO Responsibilties

1.2.3 Working Party Responsibilities

2.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS

2.1 CRITERIA FOR EXCESS SOIL DISPOSAL

2.2 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE

2.2.1 Areas of Known Contamination

2.2.2 Areas of Unknown Contamination

2.2.3 Health and Safety Field Screening

2.2.4 Hazardous Waste Characterization

2.2.5 Soil Segregation

2.3 ANALYTICAL LABORATORY

2.4 SAMPLE FREQUENCY

2.5 EXCESS SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTION

2.5.1 Qualitative Field Screening

2.5.2 Semi-quantitative Field Screening

2.5.3 Soil Sampling

2.6 DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES

2.6.1 Soil Sampling Equipment

2.6.2 Construction Equipment

3.0 DATA EVALUATION, SOIL DISPOSITION, AND REPORTING

3.1 DATA EVALUATION

3.2 CONTAMINATED SOIL DISPOSITION

3.2.1 Petroleum-Contaminated Soil

3.2.2 Contaminated Soil Other Than PCS

3.3 REPORTING

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES

4.1 PRECISION

4.1.1 Field Precision Objectives

4.1.2 Laboratory Precision Objectives

4.2 ACCURACY

4.2.1 Field Accuracy Objectives

4.2.2 Laboratory Accuracy Objectives

4.3 COMPLETENESS

4.3.1 Field Completeness Objectives

4.3.2 Laboratory Completeness Objectives

4.4 REPRESENTATIVENESS

4.4.1 Measures to Ensure Representativeness of Field Data

4.4.2 Measures to Ensure Representativeness of Laboratory Data

4.5 COMPARABILITY

4.5.1 Measures to Ensure Comparability of Field Data

4.5.2 Measures to Ensure Comparability of Laboratory Data

5.0 QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLES

5.1 FIELD DUPLICATES

5.2 MATRIX SPIKES AND MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATES

iii

5.3 TRIP BLANKS

6.0 HANDLING AND SHIPPING OF SAMPLES

6.1 SAMPLE CONTAINERS

6.2 CUSTODY PROCEDURES

6.3 SHIPPING

6.4 DOCUMENTATION AND SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION

7.0 REFERENCES

8.0 LIST OF ACRONYMS

9.0 TABLES

TABLE 1

TABLE 2

10.0 APPENDIX

Appendix A: Laboratory Control Limits Appendix B: Forms and Records

Environmental Work Plan for Sites with No Known Contamination

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Environmental Work Plan (EWP) describes the technical approach and procedures for characterizing, handling, and disposing of excess contaminated excavated soil (excess soil) generated from projects at Eielson Air Force Base (AFB) in Fairbanks, Alaska (AK). Eielson AFB developed this generic work plan for use at project sites with no known contamination. Per the IC/LUC Settlement Agreement (16 April 2013) this plan is approved by, and satisfies DEC and EPA review and comment requirements. No further regulator review or approvals of a workplan/sampling plan is necessary prior to commencing work at sites with no known contamination where Eielson AFB elects to use and follow this generic plan, UNLESS a site-specific addendum is required due to possible presence of non-POL contaminants, contamination levels that trigger hazardous waste disposal protocols, use of a different lab, or additional testing not covered in this plan.

1.1 BACKGROUND

Eielson AFB was listed on the National Priorities List (NPL) by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in November 1989. The Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA) for Eielson AFB was signed in May 1991 by the United States Air Force (USAF), EPA, and the State of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC). The FFA identified 64 potential sources of contamination. Sixty of these sources have been addressed in either a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) under an Operable Unit (OU), or through the Source Evaluation Report (SER) process. Record of Decision (ROD) documents for OU1, OU2 (and some SER sites), and OU6 were signed in 1994. A ROD for OUs 3, 4, 5 (including some SER sites) was signed in 1995. The Sitewide ROD, was signed in 1997. Amendments to the OU3, 4, 5 RODs were completed in 1998. Amendments to the OU2 ROD were completed in 2001.

Areas not covered under the FFA are managed according to the most current federal and state regulations concerning the discovery of contaminated soil.

Excess soil generated following construction projects in areas known or suspected to be contaminated may require characterization to determine appropriate disposal. This EWP presents analytical parameters and test methods, sample-screening methods, sampling frequency, and provisions for characterizing potentially contaminated soil.

A working party prepared project Health and Safety Plan (HASP), provides guidance and procedures to protect the health of personnel involved in the construction activities. The HASP includes safety guidance to workers involved in soil sampling activities. Working party technicians will provide health and safety monitoring under contract for the project. Excess soil characterization described in this EWP, will also be performed by construction personnel.

1.2 RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROJECT PERSONNEL

The Commander, 354 Civil Engineer Squadron (CES), Eielson AFB, has directed that excess soil generated during construction be characterized and a regulatory evaluation be provided to CES at Eielson AFB for proper disposal or treatment. The following sections list the key personnel and describe the responsibilities of the various parties involved in this project.

1.2.1 CEAN Responsibilities

CES is considered the generator of the excess soil and ultimately responsible for treatment and/or disposal.

The working party will provide the Environmental Engineering branch (CEAN) with qualitative and semi-quantitative field screening results, analytical results and assist CEAN with the evaluation of appropriate excess soil disposal/treatment options.

1.2.2 CEO Responsibilities

Operations Flight (CEO) will review and coordinate Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Requests (AF Form 103s) submitted by the working party. If work is to occur in areas of contamination known to CEAN, the approved Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request will indicate the areas where contamination is suspected and list contaminant types.

If previously known contamination exists, this plan no longer applies and a separate SAP will be prepared.

Following characterization of excess soil in unknown contaminated areas and when CEAN requires the working party to sample in known areas, the working party will provide CEO and CEAN with the analytical results and regulatory evaluation of excess soil disposal and treatment options. CEAN will coordinate excess soil treatment/disposal, and ensure that excess soil is treated/disposed in accordance with regulatory requirements.

1.2.3 Working Party Responsibilities

The working party is responsible for the following tasks:

1. Preparation and submission of a Base Civil Engineer Work Request (AF Form 332) and a Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request (AF Form 103).

2. Field oversight for Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request compliance.

3. Field-screening excess soil using both qualitative (visual, olfactory, etc) and semi-quantitative field screening methods.

4. Reporting contamination when it is encountered per section 2.2.2.

5. Collecting soil samples and submitting them to the laboratory for chemical analysis when required by CEAN.

6. Analyzing the chemical data and providing an analysis of appropriate treatment/disposal option for excess soil. Prior and present laboratory analysis results and field screening methods will dictate the appropriate treatment or disposal.

7. Consulting with CEAN for direction on where to dispose of potentially contaminated soil.

8. Stockpiling and transporting excess soil.

9. Providing analytical services.

10. Appropriate remediation of contaminated soil.

The working party’s principal investigator is responsible for overall management of excess soil characterization activities, including adherence to the procedures described in this plan.

The working party’s quality assurance (QA) officer is responsible for conducting scheduled field audits and providing ongoing review, monitoring, and evaluation of the field and laboratory activities; the QA officer will independently validate all laboratory reports.

Excess soil sampling will be conducted or supervised by “qualified persons” as defined in Appendix A of ADEC’s Underground Storage Tanks (UST) Procedures Manual (ADEC, 2002) and 18 Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 75.990.

Whenever the working party suspects or has knowledge of a leak, spill, or release of oil, hazardous substances, or regulated substances not previously identified to CEAN, the working party shall immediately notify CEAN at (907) 377-7745. The working party shall also prepare an ADEC Oil and Hazardous Materials Incident Report Form in accordance with ADEC regulations. The working party shall be responsible for delivering by hand, emailing, or faxing the completed form to CEAN, (907) 377-3367, who will be responsible for providing notification to the ADEC as required per 18 AAC 75.300. The working party shall reevaluate the Site Safety and Health Plan and alter as appropriate before proceeding.

In accordance with 18 AAC 75.310, a working party will be responsible for cleanup of all leaks, spills, and releases of oil, hazardous substances, or regulated substances caused by the working party during this project.

2.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS

This section provides the excess soil disposal criteria, analytical schedule, sampling requirements and procedures.

2.1 CRITERIA FOR EXCESS SOIL DISPOSAL

Excess soil generated during this project will be repurposed on base, unless it is deemed to exceed soil clean up levels defined in 18 AAC 75. Applicable compounds are the contaminants of concern (COCs) listed in the records of decision and contaminants previously discovered on Eielson AFB. When a AF103 Base Civil Engineer Work Request is submitted, sites are evaluated under the IC/LUC process to verify that they will not impact contaminated areas, this includes research into past site usage and checking proximity to contaminated sites.

This plan will only cover procedures for POL contaminants in detail. Field screening, sampling, and testing for POL contaminants will follow procedures laid out in the ADEC Field Sampling Guidance. If other possible contaminants are determined during the IC/LUC process, they will be addressed in a site-specific addendum. Applicable contaminant types found on Eielson include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Petroleum products

2. VOCs

3. SVOCs

4. Halogenated hydrocarbons

5. Organochlorine pesticides

6. Metals

Table 2 lists contaminant types, COCs, and Clean Up Level criteria. The references for Clean Up Level criteria are as follows:

1. Petroleum Hydrocarbons (POL): 18 AAC 75.341, Table B2, “Under 40 Inch Zone”, migration to groundwater.

2. All Contaminants Other Than POL: 18 AAC 75.341, Table B1, “Under 40 Inch Zone,” migration to groundwater.

2.2 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE

Excess soil will be generated outside areas of known or suspected contamination on Eielson AFB. Excess soil generated outside areas of known contamination that exhibit no indication of contamination during field screening will be disposed of on base. The chemical analyses used to determine whether excess soil is polluted are based on known COCs, previous Eielson AFB site characterization, and qualitative field screening, as described in the following sections. Table 2 shows contaminant groups and cleanup levels for soil in regards to migration to groundwater.

CEAN will provide information about known contamination as part of the Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request process. Current practice is for the working party to file Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Requests with Eielson AFB. As part of the permit approval process, CEAN will review available environmental data to (1) delineate areas where excess soil may require characterization before disposal, (2) list probable/known soil contaminants, and (3) determine if soil samples from excess soils in known contaminated areas will require further laboratory analysis. This information will be provided and attached to the approved Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request.

2.2.1 Areas of Known Contamination

Work conducted in areas of known contamination will not be covered under this work plan.

2.2.2 Areas of Unknown Contamination

The working party will use the criteria in this screening plan, approved by CEAN, ADEC, and EPA, to detect contamination in areas of unknown contamination. A photo ionization detector (PID) will be used to screen for contamination using headspace samples.

As contaminated soils or water (odors, free product, sheen, staining, field screening readings greater than 20 ppm) are encountered the working party shall inform the Project Managers (USAF, to include USACE) as soon as safely practicable and implement the management plan for the contaminated materials as indicated in the Work Plan and any adjustments to the safety practices that are needed. The USAF Project Manager will inform Base Environmental, CES/CEAN IRP, and if applicable, the Contracting Officer/Representative. The working party shall proceed with the work unless directed otherwise by a Contracting Officer/Representative or a Project Manager. The intent of the notification is to assess the level of contamination and to assure that the work area is consistent with this Work Plan. Environmental Engineering will contact applicable regulators to inform of discovered contamination.

The Project Manager shall keep personnel from Base Environmental Engineering and 354 CES/CEAN IRP and the Contracting Officer (Representative) informed throughout the project as additional contaminated media are encountered. The CEAN Element personnel will be responsible for regulatory notifications to DEC/PERP (and EPA if applicable) when contamination is discovered.

If PID screening levels in the excavation or in excess soils exceed 20 ppm, the soils will be separately stockpiled by <20 ppm (presumed clean), >=20 ppm to <100ppm (suspected), and >=100 ppm (known).

Analytical samples and testing will be conducted based on the ADEC Field Sampling Guidance Appendix F: Determination of Sampling and Lab Analysis for Petroleum in Soil and Groundwater. Stockpiles will be appropriately placed, covered, and sampled per the Field Sampling Guidance. Contaminated excess soils can ONLY be placed back into the excavation with the approval of ADEC (and EPA if applicable).

If contamination levels exceed the cleanup levels in 18 AAC 75, CEAN will notify the Prevention and Emergency Response Program (PERP) (and EPA if applicable) immediately of the newly discovered contaminated site. (Spill reporting, separate from exceeding cleanup levels, will follow section 1.2.3 Working Party Responsibilities).

2.2.3 Health and Safety Field Screening

The working party will conduct health and safety monitoring to protect workers. Health and safety screening consists of measuring organic vapors in the worker’s breathing zone using a PID, and making visual and olfactory observations during trenching operations. The health and safety action level for organic vapor monitoring is 5 parts per million (ppm).

A working party field representative who is an ADEC ‘qualified person’ and able to field screen will be on-site with excavation crews at all times that the working party is excavating in areas of known or suspected contamination. If organic vapor monitoring health and safety screening levels are exceeded, or visual observations or olfactory observations give working party personnel reason to believe that excess soil might exceed clean up levels, this excess soil will be separately stockpiled on top of 10-mil sheeting for short-term storage and 20-mil sheeting for long-term storage, and covered with 6-mil reinforced polyethylene sheeting. Sheet edges will be rolled to prevent contact of soil with moisture from precipitation runoff and will be sufficiently secured to prevent the covering material to be blown away by seasonal wind action. The working party will evaluate qualitative field screening evidence and existing environmental data, and will select appropriate analytical methods. These analyses may either be in addition to CEAN Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request requirements or may stand-alone in areas where the Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request does not require analysis.

2.2.4 Hazardous Waste Characterization

Under certain circumstances that are discussed further in Section 3.0, soil exceeding clean up level criteria will require hazardous waste characterization before disposal. In these cases, the analytical requirements will be determined on a case-by-case basis. This would be covered under a site specific addendum.

2.2.5 Soil Segregation

Stockpiled soil will be in accordance with 18 AAC 75.370. Soil will be segregated and stockpiled separately in the following cases:

1. Soil will be segregated based on sampling requirements listed on the Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request.

2. Soil will be segregated based on field screening data and or current laboratory analysis.

3. Soil in suspected contaminated areas will be separated into stockpiles by known, suspected, and presumed clean criteria laid out in 2.2.2.

2.3 ANALYTICAL LABORATORY

The prime analytical laboratory will be SGS.

SGS North America Inc. –Alaska Division Environmental Services 200 W. Potter Drive

Anchorage, AK 99518 907-550-3206 UST-005, Expires: Dec 18 2013

If another lab is to be used, it will be identified in a site-specific addendum, including the DEC lab approval number found at the following website:

http://dec.alaska.gov/applications/eh/ehllabreports/USTLabs.aspx

2.4 SAMPLE FREQUENCY

Individual streams of excess soil will be generated under the following conditions or frequencies for purposes of characterization for disposal:

For areas where field screening indicates that soil is contaminated as described in Section 2.5.1, analytical samples will be taken from the stockpile and from the excavation basin in accordance with ADEC Field Sampling Guidance Tables 2A and 2B. In addition to the analytical sample, the working party will qualitative field screen the contamination end points along the excavation.

2.5 EXCESS SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTION

Excess soil samples will be determined by Table 2A and 2B of the ADEC Field Sampling Guidance, in addition to consultation with CEAN to review possible past site uses. Any sampling that does not follow Table 2A and 2B will be discussed in a site specific addendum.

http://dec.alaska.gov/applications/eh/ehllabreports/USTLabs.aspx

2.5.1 Qualitative Field Screening

Qualitative field screening will be used to delineate areas of suspected contamination not previously identified as a known contaminated site. Visual survey of the area for evidence of staining, sheen, dead or distressed vegetation, or other signs indicating possible contamination will be used. Odors are noticed during site inspection or excavation will also be used for signs of possible contamination.

2.5.2 Semi-quantitative Field Screening

The PID used for health and safety monitoring and described in Section 2.2.2 will be used for semi-quantitative field screening. The semi-quantitative screening methods described here are adapted from the ADEC Field Sampling Guidance. Semi-quantitative field screening samples will be collected at the following frequencies and locations:

1. Areas where qualitative field screening indicate suspect contamination.

2. At regular 20-foot intervals from excess suspect contaminated soils generated along piping runs.

3. Following ADEC Field Sampling Guidance Table 2A and 2B.

Semi-quantitative field screening will use the headspace analytical screening procedure described in the ADEC Field Sampling Guidance. This method is summarized below:

1. Partially fill (one-third to one-half) a clean jar or clean ziplock bag with freshly uncovered excess soil.

2. Quickly close or seal the jar or bag.

3. Shake or agitate sample for 15 seconds.

4. Warm to at least 40F and allow to stand for between 10 and 60 minutes. (To the extent practicable, contractor will try to keep sampling times consistent in the 10-60 minute range, ie 15 minutes of standing for each sample)

5. Shake or agitate sample for 15 seconds.

6. Insert sampling probe to one-half the headspace depth, and minimize the size of the container opening.

7. Record the highest meter reading on the field record, normally between 2-5 seconds after probe insertion

8. Document all field sampling results in the field record or log book.

2.5.3 Soil Sampling

Soil samples will be collected by a working party field representative using the procedures described in 18 AAC 75. This method is summarized here:

1. Estimate the volume of the waste stream and, using Section 2.4 of this plan, determine the necessary number of samples.

2. Select sample locations using the highest semi-quantitative field values as determined using the procedure described in Section 2.5.2. Before sampling, remove a minimum of 18 inches of soil from the surface of the waste pile.

3. Collect all samples with pre-cleaned sampling equipment that has been decontaminated according to the procedures in Section 2.6 of this plan. Disposable gloves must be worn and changed between samples collections.

4. Do not collect composite samples. All samples will be grab samples.

5. Fill sample containers quickly. Fill GRO/BTEX and Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) containers first. Refer to ADEC Field Sampling Guidance Appendix D for additional sample container information. Field duplicate sample containers will be filled alternately.

6. Quickly and adequately seal containers, and clean rims before tightening lids. The GRO/BTEX and VOC analyses are unique and require preservation using methanol, as per ADEC Field Sampling Guidance Appendix F.

7. After filling, promptly place containers into a cooler containing Blue Ice or similar product and cooled to 4°C.

Sample identification, chain-of-custody, and sample shipping procedures are discussed in Section 6.0 of this EWP.

2.6 DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES

This section describes decontamination procedures for equipment used for excess soil sampling and construction.

2.6.1 Soil Sampling Equipment

The following six-step procedure will be used to decontaminate waste soil sampling equipment.

Equipment will be decontaminated before each use.

1. Rinse and pre-clean in potable water.

2. Wash in solution of laboratory grade, non-phosphate-based soap and potable water.

3. Dip rinse in potable water.

4. Rinse with n-propyl alcohol.

5. Rinse with distilled water.

6. Place on clean polyethylene sheeting or within a clean container to drain and air dry.

Solutions will be renewed as needed. Sponges and nylon scrubbers will be used during steps 1 through 3.

Equipment will be air-dried, if possible, and held in clean plastic bags between uses. Decontamination blanks will be collected, in accordance with ADEC Draft Field Sampling Guidance, at a rate of 1 per 20 similar samples, minimum one.

2.6.2 Construction Equipment

Following completion of work in areas of previously unknown contamination, construction equipment may require decontamination at the discretion of CEAN. Areas of previously unknown contamination will be identified by field screening methods. If CEAN requires decontamination, all loose soil will be scraped onto 20 mil liner for collection. The piece of equipment will then be driven or transported to 2832 Flightline Avenue, where it will be pressure washed. Decontamination rinses from unknown contaminated soils will be contained in 55-gallon drums. Rinsates will be segregated according to the area of unknown contamination, stored at the Haz Waste Disposal Facility until characterization is complete, and treated or disposed of based on results of testing.

3.0 DATA EVALUATION, SOIL DISPOSITION, AND

REPORTING

This section provides the technical approach to excess soil data evaluation and disposition. Reporting is also discussed in this section.

3.1 DATA EVALUATION

The working party will evaluate analytical results from individual excess soil stockpiles by comparing them with clean up level criteria shown on Table 2. The following matrix shows guidelines for soil disposition:

Results of Soil Stockpile Characterization Guidelines for Soil Disposition Base Civil Engineering Work Clearance Request has no soil sampling requirements and qualitative field screening indicates that soil is not contaminated.

Soil stockpile pre-approved for disposal or reuse on Eielson AFB.

Chemical analyses show that all samples collected from soil stockpile meet clean up level criteria.

Soil stockpile is acceptable for disposal into Eielson AFB Asbestos Landfill.

Landfill disposal criteria are exceeded for one or more POL compounds (benzene, GRO, DRO, RRO) in at least one sample.

Soil is thermally treated and subsequently disposal into Eielson AFB Landfill. Stockpiling procedures are discussed in Section 3.2later.

Landfill disposal criteria are exceeded for clean up level parameters other than POLs.

Soils will be stockpiled at the designated stockpile area awaiting ultimate disposition. Working party will review analytical results and provide recommendations to CEAN for additional analyses, if appropriate. Following chemical characterization, the working party will provide an evaluation evaluate treatment/disposal options of appropriate excess soil treatment/disposal options to, coordinate with CEAN to gain regulatory clearances (ex:

ADEC Permission to Transport), and dispose of it.

3.2 DISPOSITION OF SOIL EXCEEDING CLEAN UP LEVELS

Excess soil that exceeds the clean up level criteria will be either treated or disposed offsite.

Excess contaminated soil will be stockpiled by the working party according to short term storage requirements listed in 18 AAC 75.370, which are summarized here:

1. Contaminated soil will be stockpiled by the working party at an onsite location agreed upon with

CEAN.

2. Contaminated soil will be placed on a 10-mil thick liner conforming to the applicable specifications listed on Table D of 18 AAC 75.370.

3. Stockpiles will be covered with liner and secured in place by sandbags or pavers.

4. After the stockpiles are covered, the piles will be marked showing original excavated location.

5. Soil stockpiles will be inspected and maintained regularly by the working party to ensure that the cover remains intact until the project is complete.

6. Following soil treatment, soil stockpile liners and covers will be disposed of by the working party as IDW if contamination is present.

Additionally,

1. Stockpiles will be labeled with the name of the working party point of contact and phone number.

2. Stockpiles will be numbered chronologically, labeled with date started, project, and contaminant.

3.2.1. Petroleum-Contaminated Soil

Once regulatory Approval to Transport is obtained, CEAN will make arrangements to thermally treat POL-contaminated soil (PCS) at a local treatment facility. Consequently, while awaiting treatment, PCS generated during the project will be stockpiled by the working party at a location agreed upon by CEAN.

3.2.2 Contaminants Other Than PCS

If soil exceeding clean up level criteria for contaminants other than the PCS compound types (GRO, DRO, RRO, and BTEX) is discovered while working on a site thought to be PCS only, it will require a site specific addendum to coordinate offsite treatment or disposal with the regulators. Excess soil falling into this category will be stockpiled according to the procedures described in Section 3.2 of this plan at an onsite location approved by CEAN.

A determination about appropriate offsite disposal of these excess soil stockpiles will be made on a case-by-case basis, covered in a site specific addendum.

The working party may recommend that additional chemical analysis be performed as appropriate to determine whether the excess soil stockpile is either:

1. A RCRA hazardous waste.

2. A waste under the TSCA. This criterion would primarily apply to soil contaminated with PCBs or polychlorinated dibenzo-dioxins (PCDDs)/polychlorinated dibenzo-furan (PCDFs).

CEAN will coordinate and oversee treatment and/or disposal of RCRA hazardous waste, TSCA waste, and contaminated soil. Disposal of stockpile liners and covers will be the responsibility of the working party.

3.3 REPORTING

Prior to the closeout of project, a final field report that identifies field-screening readings and locations (by GPS coordinates), soil sampling and analytical results detailing limits and level of contamination within the project footprint, and volumes of excess contaminated soil will also be submitted by the working party. If the project spans more than one field season, an interim report submitted at the end of the field season will be required. The working party shall also provide copies of analytical reports which characterize stockpiled contaminated soil and total quantities of soil placed at the stockpile area (to include a record of the dates of placement, quantities placed, and location of stockpiles). A hard copy and one electronic copy will be provided to Eielson AFB for distribution.

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES

The overall QA objective for this project is to develop and implement procedures for field sampling, chain-of-custody, laboratory analysis, and reporting that will provide technically and legally defensible results.

This section discusses QA objectives and procedures for this project.

4.1 PRECISION

Precision is a measure of reproducibility of measurements of the same characteristic, usually under a given set of conditions.

4.1.1 Field Precision Objectives

Field precision will be assessed by the collection and analysis of field duplicates and will be expressed as Relative Percent Difference (RPD).

Duplicate samples are analyzed to check for matrix variability and analytical method reproducibility. At a minimum, one field duplicate will be collected for every 10 investigative samples by media and analyzed for the same parameters listed for other media samples. Field duplicate collection is discussed in Section 5.0.

4.1.2 Laboratory Precision Objectives

Precision may be calculated in terms of RPD. Precision will be assessed by comparing the analytical results between matrix spike (MS) and matrix spike duplicate (MSD) for organic analysis and between laboratory duplicates for inorganic analysis. The RPD will be calculated for each pair of duplicate analyses using the following equation:

%)100( 2/)( 21

XX

XXRPD

where:

RPD = relative percent difference.

X1, X2 = value of sample 1 and sample 2.

RPDs may be compared with the laboratory-established RPD control limits for the analysis. Appendix A shows SGS precision control limits.

4.2 ACCURACY

Accuracy is the degree of agreement of a measurement or average of measurements with an accepted reference or “true” value and is a measure of bias in the system. The accuracy of a measurement system is affected by errors introduced through the sampling process, field contamination, preservation, handling, sample matrix, sample preparation, and analytical techniques.

4.2.1 Field Accuracy Objectives

The achievement of accurate data in the field will be addressed using trip blanks and through the adherence to all sample handling, preservation, and holding times. Trip blanks are discussed in Section 5.0.

4.2.2 Laboratory Accuracy Objectives

Results for blank, matrix spikes, laboratory control samples, and surrogates will be primary indicators of accuracy. These results will be used to control accuracy by requiring that they meet specific criteria. As spiked samples are analyzed, spike recoveries will be calculated and compared with acceptance limits.

The calculation formula for percent recovery is

21 %)100)((% C

CCR −

where:

R% = spike amount recovered.

C1 = concentration of analyte in spiked sample.

C2 = concentration of analyte in un-spiked sample.

C3 = concentration of spike added.

Acceptance limits will be based on previously established laboratory performance for similar samples and shown in Appendix A. In this approach, the control limits reflect the minimum and maximum recoveries expected for individual measurements for an in-control system. Recoveries outside the established limits indicate some assignable cause, other than normal measurement error, and possible need for corrective action. Corrective actions may include recalibration of the instrument, reanalysis of the quality control (QC) sample, reanalysis of the samples in the batch, repreparation of samples in the batch, or flagging the data as suspect if the problems cannot be resolved. For contaminated samples, recovery of matrix spikes may depend on sample homogeneity, matrix interference and dilution requirements for quantitation.

4.3 COMPLETENESS

Completeness is a measure of the amount of valid data obtained from a measurement system compared with the amount expected under normal conditions.

4.3.1 Field Completeness Objectives

Field completeness is a measure of the amount of valid measurements obtained from all the measurements taken in the project. Field completeness for this project will be greater than 90 percent.

4.3.2. Laboratory Completeness Objectives

The project laboratory will provide data meeting QC acceptance criteria for a minimum of 90 percent of the samples tested using the SW-846 and other standard methods. At the completion of sample analysis testing, the percent completeness will be calculated by the following equation:

%)100(% R

SC =

where C = completeness.

S = number of successful analyses.

R = number of requested analyses.

Successful laboratory analyses can only be accomplished if both the field and laboratory portions of the project are successful.