Attch_1_(ATCH_9_QA_FA8903-19-R0074_V1_consolidated).doc
DOC document 122 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA8903-19-R-0074
About this file
Questions and Answers
View the file
Other files
Show all 20
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
FA8903-19-R-0074
ATTACHMENT 9
RFP QUESTIONS / RESPONSES
REMEDIAL ACTION OPERATIONS (RA-O) AND LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT (LTM) FOR LAUGHLIN, DYESS, GOODFELLOW, AND SHEPPARD, TEXAS
| RFP REFERENCE |
| QUESTION |
| RESPONSE |
| 1. PWS page 2 of 37, second paragraph |
| Please clarify how many semi-annual sampling events will be required of the contractor at Laughlin AFB over an 18-month POP contract. |
| Two |
| 2. PWS page 3 of 37, third paragraph |
| Are the 3 SW sampling locations at Lake Amistad Marina easily accessible from shore or is special equipment required? |
| Please refer to the Remedial Action Operations and Long-Term Management Laughlin AFB, Del Rio Texas. January 2019 USACE Dip sampling devices are stated but the contractor should review existing UFP-QAPP for specific requirements. QAPP, Laughlin AFB Performance-Based Remediation at Texas Bases, AF Plant 4, Dyess AFB, Goodfellow AFB, Randolph AFB, and Sheppard AFB is AR# 648 |
| 3. PWS Section 2, page 17 |
| Could the government please provide the following documents not found on the AFCEC Admin Record website? |
- Laughlin AFB Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). LATA, 2016
- Final Five-Year Review for Dyess AFB, 30 Sep 2016
- Final RAP Site CG022 at Laughlin AFB, April 2015
- Draft Final Annual Long-Term Monitoring Report, Site ST004, Goodfellow AFB, August 2017
- LUCIPs for each installation Dyess AR# AR-771 Final Five Year Review For the Laughlin AFB Final RAP Site CG022 April 2015 AR#838.
Goodfellow AR# 479 Final 2017 Annual Long Term Monitoring Report at ST004 (There was no Draft Final for this contract.)
No LUCIPs for Dyess, Goodfellow, Sheppard
Laughlin AFB Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). Draft QAPP 2019 will be available.
| 4. PWS Section 3.6.4 |
| The PWS cites that GPS data will be required for “all field locations to mark all points of the field investigation”. We understand a survey of the new MWs would be required. Would any additional GPS/survey data be required? |
| No |
| 5. PWS Section 3.6.8 |
| Other than drilling related permits, what other permits might be required? |
| No permits required for LUCs inspection at Dyess, Goodfellow, and Sheppard. |
| 6. PWS Section 6.10.5 – Laughlin AFB sites |
| The PWS is not specific about reporting requirements. |
- Will Draft/Draft Final/Final Reports be required?
- Will hard copies be required?
- How many copies are required?
- Who will they be submitted to?
Please refer to Exhibit A for reporting requirements.
Will be addressed in kick-off meeting.
| 7. PWS page 28 |
| Will a geophysical investigation be required for utilities prior to MW installation or just normal clearance through base Civil Engineering/Public Works? |
| Base CE dig permit for clearance is sufficient |
| 8. PWS page 28 |
| Is the contractor responsible to physically walk the utility clearance ticket around for signing off of all relevant base personnel or is there an automated system at Laughlin AFB? |
| Assume no need to walk the clearance ticket. RPMs will assist. |
| 9. PWS page 32 - 33 |
| Please confirm that the contractor will be responsible for only one annual LUC inspection/report per installation over an 18-month POP contract. |
| Yes |
Yes, only one annual LUC per installation as stated in the PWS. Inspection time frame will be discussed at kick-off meeting.
| 10. PWS page 29 - 32 |
| It is understood that an area will be provided for temporary storage of purge water IDW. |
- How long will it be allowed to remain there?
- And as a result, how many characterization sampling events will be required for its disposal?
Please refer to applicable base QAPP documents in the Waste Management Plan for applicable requirements. For example, Laughlin AFB, QAPP USACE 2019, the waste generated during this project will be appropriately stored, profiled, and of offsite in accordance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and instructions. All waste will be stored on site in U.S. Department of Transportation-approved 55-gallon drums. Each container will be labeled with a label indicating “This Container On Hold Pending Analysis.”
This label will be marked with the content of the drums, the source of the investigation-derived waste (IDW), the start date of generation, and a contact phone number for the contractor PM.
IDW consisting of decontamination and purge water and LNAPL generated during sampling and removal activities will be characterized before disposal. The sampling procedure will follow the guidelines presented in the U.S. EPA Test Methods of Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, SW-846 (U.S. EPA 2015).
Up to two liquid samples will be collected: (1) one from the 55-gallon drum containing LNAPLrelated waste, and (2) one from the 55-gallon drums containing decontamination and purge water from all other monitoring wells. Liquid samples will be collected using bottleware provided by the laboratory.
Liquid samples will be analyzed for the following constituents by ALS Laboratories:
• VOCs using U.S. EPA Method 8260B
• TPH by Texas Method 1005/1006
• Metals and Mercury using U.S. EPA Method 6020A/7470A
• Cyanide by U.S. EPA Method 9012B
• Flashpoint by U.S. EPA Method 1010A/1020B
• Corrosivity (pH) by SM4500H+B
• Sulfide by SM4500-S2-F
• pH using U.S. EPA Method 9045D
All non-dedicated sampling equipment such as bladder pump and interface probe will be decontaminated between each use.
Liquid waste from the 55-gallon drums will be classified for transport and disposal based on its waste characteristics. Liquid waste will be transported under manifest by a licensed waste hauler to an appropriately licensed disposal facility within 90 days of generation in compliance with the federal regulations. Appropriate Air Force personnel will sign the manifests for all regulated materials leaving the site.
| 11. PWS page 32 |
| Please confirm that there are 16 sites at Dyess AFB with LUCs that require inspection and reporting. |
| Confirm 16 sites |
| 12. PWS page 33 |
| Please confirm that there are 8 sites at Goodfellow AFB with LUCs that require inspection and reporting. |
| Confirm 8 sites |
| 13. PWS page 33 |
| Please confirm that there are 8 sites at Sheppard AFB with LUCs that require inspection and reporting. |
| Confirm 8 sites |
| 14. PWS pages 32 and 33 |
| Please clarify/describe the certification requirements for the annual LUC reports. |
| In the Annual Inspection Report, the Type of monitoring (e.g., self-reporting, drive by): The Air Force is responsible for |
implementing, maintaining, monitoring, reporting, and enforcing LUCs. Day-to-day implementation of these responsibilities is carried out through the Laughlin AFB personnel who informs, monitors, and enforces the LUC requirements for all on-site contractors. Dyess AFB and Goodfellow similarly, has internal inspections on annual basis self reported.
| 15. Schedule 4 / Appendix B |
| May the contractor alter/edit Schedule 4 / Appendix B or is it to be left as is? (The RAER’s and the annual LUC inspection reports are not included, for example.) |
| Yes, Atch 4 Schd B must include all deliverables stated in the PWS. |
Will be addressed in kick-off meeting.
| 16. |
| Will the government be providing Site Inspection Checklists for the LUC inspections and reports? |
| This will be provided at kick-off meeting. |
| 17. |
| Will the government provide access to GIS data files needed to build maps and figures? |
| Yes, if available. |
| 18. |
| Will the government provide historic RA-O data (e.g., lab data) in a digital (MS Excel) format? |
| Yes usually available from ERPIMS or previous RAO contract information. |
| 19. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Is there a specific period (e.g., month or quarter) when the LUC inspections and/or groundwater sampling events are required to be conducted at each installation? |
| Use existing annual inspection reports, annual groundwater reports, and RAER from each base to determine approximate dates to perform and submit LUC inspections and/or groundwater sampling events for each installation. |
| 20. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Historically, has the purge water been disposed of as anything other than non-hazardous? |
| Assume non-hazardous |
| 21. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Do the monitoring wells to be sampled contain dedicated equipment or tubing? If so, please specify type(s). |
| Assume that they may not have dedicated tubing; however, review of monitoring reports is recommended. |
| 22. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Please confirm how many semi-annual monitoring events need to be performed under this contract? |
| None for Dyess, Goodfellow and Sheppard. |
Two per year at Laughlin. Please refer to PWS 6.10.5 requirements.
| 23. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Please confirm how many annual inspection/LUC events need to be performed under this contract? |
| One per base or as specified in PWS section. |
| 24. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Please confirm that the scope of work is limited to “LUCs site inspections and reporting” for Dyess, Goodfellow, and Sheppard AFBs. |
| Confirmed |
| 25. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Are all monitoring wells easily accessible by a standard pickup truck? |
| Assume accessible |
| 26. PWS Section 3.0 |
| How much advance notice does each installation require of the contractor to obtain site access? |
| Assume minimum of 3 or 4 weeks for to obtain access. |
| 27. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| If there are any access restrictions at any of the sites under this contract? Please indicate the anticipated timeframe to gain access to these areas when on site. |
| Should not be an issue during normal working hours at Dyess, Goodfellow and Sheppard. |
Laughlin sites will require escort by 47 CES personnel. Contractors are generally expected to work between 0600 and 1800 hrs
| 28. PWS Section 2.0 |
| Are all documents, identified in Section 2.0 of the PWS, available on the AFCEC Administrative Record? |
| Yes. |
| 29. PWS Section 4.0 |
| Are all current SAP/WPs available on the AFCEC Administrative Record? |
| Yes |
| 30. PWS Section 4.0 |
| Is the QPP site specific or can it cover all work per installation? |
| Assume installation wide QPP |
| 31. PWS Section 4.0 |
| Is a QPP required for Dyess, Goodfellow, and Sheppard AFBs. |
| Assume not required but as any new wells are included for specified bases or sites, these wells and specific sampling parameters would be required in the QPP. |
| 32. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| With the exception of well installation conducted under this contract, have all current well construction and analytical results for each site been uploaded to ERPIMS? |
| Assume yes for all sampling that were performed up to now |
| 33. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Are there any site-specific trainings required to work on this project or access the sites? |
| Dyess requires basic environmental awareness training. |
| 34. PWS Section 6.10.6 |
| Is required repair work limited to only signage, fencing, and well damage that occurs during the contract period of performance? |
| Contractor is also liable for damages other than signage, fencing, and well damage that occurs during the contract period of performance |
| 35. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Please confirm that bidders must assume that IDW from each site must be directly sampled for waste characterization. Many waste transportation and disposal subcontractors do not require additional waste characterization beyond the soil/groundwater sampling results IDW. |
| Yes, IDW must be characterized |
| 36. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| If the IDW from each site must be sampled directly for waste characterization, are there any contract requirements for what parameters the IDW samples must be analyzed for? |
| See prior sampling reports. Please refer to applicable base QAPP documents in the Waste Management Plan for applicable requirements. |
| 37. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Can LUC reporting at all sites specific to each installation be combined into one report. |
| Yes, installation wide LUC reports are preferred. |
| 38. PWS Section 6.10.5 |
| Please confirm that there is only one inspection and one report required under this contract |
| One report per installation. |
| 39. |
| Can the RAERs for CG022 and SS014A/B be combined into one report? |
| Yes |
| 40. |
| Can the RA-O reports for SS014D and TA500 be combined into one report? |
| No |
| 41. |
| Are there any soil or groundwater sampling requirement for FT005 at Laughlin AFB? |
| See PWS |
| 42. |
| Please confirm that well abandonment is to be performed under this contract. If so, please provide the circumstances under which well abandonment will be required. |
| See PWS |
| 43. |
| What permits are anticipated to be required for this project. |
| No permits are required for LUCs inspections for Dyess, Goodfellow and Sheppard. |
Minimum is dig permits from the installation
| 44. |
| Is a photography permit required to conduct photo documentation of site activities? |
| Dyess, Goodfellow, Sheppard - If only taking pictures of the sites and nothing sensitive is captured, it is not normally required. But at all installations clear all photo items with the escort first. |
Will be covered in kickoff meeting
| 45. |
| If there is a specific location where drums of IDW at Laughlin AFB must be staged, please provide its location. |
| Building 43. |
Will be covered in kickoff meeting
| 46. |
| Please provide a copy of the TCEQ SWR No. 69007; TCEQ Hazardous Waste Permit No. HW-50258; EPA ID No. TX2571524140; Regulated Entity No. RN102686086. |
| TCEQ SWR No. 69007, TCEQ Hazardous Waste Permit No. HW-50258, refer to AR# 240 under Laughlin but AR# 829, 604, 603, 601 and possibly others depending on search. |
| 47. PWS 2.0 |
| Please provide a copy of the approved Laughlin AFB RAER by TCEQ on 18 October 2017. |
| The copy can be found under AR #822 Approval with Comments |
Response Action Effectiveness Report, Site SSOl 4 (Fuel Receiving and Storage Area, Subareas A, Band DJ, dated August 11, 2017
Laughlin Air Force Base (AFB), Del Rio, Val Verde County, Texas;
TCEQ SWR No. 69007; TCEQ Hazardous Waste Permit No. HW-50258; EPA ID No.
TX2571524140; Customer No. CN600919401; Regulated Entity No. RN102686086
| 48. PWS 2.0 |
| Will separate Scoping Documents (WP, HSP, SAP and QCP) be required for each base? |
| SAP only required at Laughlin. Other installations have no sampling. |
| 49. PWS 4.11 |
| What are the anticipated months/dates of the semiannual monitoring events? |
| Laughlin semi-annual events are usually in Jan/Feb and July/August. |
| 50. PWS 6.10.5 |
| Will there be three semiannual monitoring events covered under this 18-month POP? |
| Just two. See PWS. |
| 51. PWS 6.10.5 |
| Please confirm the laboratory analysis for the MNA parameters discussed at site CG022. |
| Yes. See PWS |
| 52. PWS 6.10.5 |
| Please provide copies of the current LUC reports for Dyess Goodfellow and Sheppard AFB. |
| Dyess has not had an annual inspection. |
Goodfellow AR# 472.
Sheppard AR# 389.
| 53. PWS 6.10.5 |
| Please provide a list of current remedial and monitoring equipment. |
| N/A for Dyess, Goodfellow and Sheppard. |
See prior reports in AR.
| 54. PWS 6.10.6 |
| What is the anticipated remedial and/or monitoring equipment that would need to be replaced or repaired? |
| N/A for Dyess, Goodfellow and Sheppard. |
Contractor rent equipments.
Will be covered in kickoff meeting
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
File details come from the government source that posted it.