Responses QA-RFP_20260406.pdf

QUESTIO

N

RFP REFERENCE

CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS

ANSWERS BY GOVERNMENT

"Section L, Part 3 Proposal Submission, Subpart a) Proposal

Submission item (2) and Subpart b) Proposal Files Item i) on (page

5)"

"Please clarify terms with a definition and/or use of the same term throughout the document. In both of these paragraphs on page 5 the Air Force uses the terms "cover page and/or letter", "cover page", and "cover sheet" are these different items or the same item?"

The Government considers the language and definitions are consistant throughout the RFP.

"Section L, Part 4 Volume 1 - Factor 1:Tehcnial Approach, general comment"

"Request increase in the page count to 25 pages for Factor 1. A 15 page limit provided for the technical approach which includes two subfactors with an extensive list of mandatory items to address for evaluation is onerously limiting."

Follow the requirements in the solicitation.

"Section L, Part 4 Volume 1 - Factor 1:Tehcnial Approach, subpart

b) Sub-Factor2: Management Approach, item v). Page 8"

"Remove this requirement. An audited and approved property management system is not appropriate for a Firm Fixed Price

Contract. That system is a requirement for Cost Reimbursable contracts.

In this paragraph, the AF requires, "a statement confirming the Offeror has a current and approved property management system." "

The governnent does not anticipate the use of GFP/GFE However, if the contractor would propose the use of GFP/GFE, and the government accepts, the contractor will need an approved property management system.

"Section L, Part 5 Volume 2 -Factor 2: Past Performance, part d) subpart xi) page 9"

"Clarify that Interim CPARS can be used when Final CPARS have not been issued in lieu of a PPQ. Stated in this subpart, "Interim CPARS are acceptable for contracts that have not been completed." A project may be complete but a Final CPARS may not have been issued yet."

Both CPARS and PPQ are required to be completed and submitted. An interm CPARS may be submitted if a final is not available.

"Section L, Part 5 Volume 2 -Factor 2: Past Performance, part d) subpart xi) page 9 and item f) on Page 12"

"Conflict between Page 9 and page 12. Clarify that either a CPARS or PPQ must be provided for each contract. As written it is unclear and the instructions appear to suggest one or the other based on availability of the CPARS. This is in direct conflict with part f) Past Performance Questionnaire, page 12, which states "For all contracts submitted under Factor 2 a PPQ and a final CPARS must be completed and submitted. Suggest edits to the section on Page 12 to clarify and/or between PPQ and

CPARS and allow for submission on Interim CPARS if a final has not yet been provided, even if the project is complete."

Please see response provided for question 4.

"PPQ Form (Attachment 4b)"

"Can any previously received PPQ be submitted regardless of format given other agencies use different formats for PPQs?" Previously complete PPQs may be submitted provided that the documents do not reference any other RFP. A different format is acceptable if it includ all information included in the format provided.

"Section M, Part 4.0 Factor 3: Past Performance (Page 6)"

"In the document, Factor 3 is used twice for both past performance and for Price (4.0 Factor 2 Paste Performance) (page 6)" No error exists in the solicitation.

"Conflict between L page10 and M page 7 regarding "Key scope characteristics""

"Resolve/clarify "key scope characteristics" between L and M. A conflict exists between L and M for "key scope characteristics" for past performance. Item e), sub item ii), sub sub item (1), page 10 of L does not include RCRA just CERCLA however, Section M, Page 7 first bullet, middle of the page includes reference to both CERCAL and RCRA."

Please see response provided for question 7.

"General Inquiry"

"Please provide the most updated CSMs performed as part of the PFOA/PFAS Site Evaluations that are more recent than

2021."

PFOA/PFAS work is out of scope for this contract outside of IDW management.

"General Inquiry"

"What community involvement plans have been written at these sites for both Keesler and Columbus? Please provide most recent documents."

The Final CIP for 2024 has been uploaded to the AR.

"General Inquiry"

"Where is the location for IDW storage at both Columbus and Keesler?" IDW storage for Columbus is in the contractor layout yard. Keesler does no currently have a set place for IDW storage and will be determined at a later time.

"1.3.2 Item O"

"Provide the profiles for the listed IDW containers that offerors would be responsible for, that are outlined in the SOW." Successful offeror will be responsible for profiling the IDW to include sampling and analysis.

13 "General Inquiry" "Please provide the existing RCRA permit for Keesler." The existing RCRA permit can be found in the AR.

"General Inquiry"

"Enclosure 2b outlines the Columbus gauging frequency and shows that 2 "Well Lost in the Last PBR or well that needs to be replaced". The provided information is dated. Will the installation of 2 new wells be required as part of this contract?"

Enclosure 2b is not applicable per PWS Section 1.2. Well installation/replacement are options in the Sub-CLIN Structure if required o needed.

"PWS 1.3.1 Table 1, ST007 (Keesler)"

"The most recent available data in the AR is the 2021 annual LTMR (AR #670) which is four years old. Please provide the current annual report for ST007 so that the scope of work can be developed based on up to date information."

AR has been updated.

"PWS Section 1.3.2 enumerated list “s”"

"The contractor is asked to incorporate wells TMW25-20 through TMW25-26 into the monitoring program. These wells do not appear to currently exist. Does AF expect the contractor in install monitoring wells TMW25-20 through TMW25-26?"

This requirement is not included in the PWS.

"Within the conclusions section of the most recent SS025 semi-annual report (June 2024) in the AR"

"It is suggested to abandon monitoring well TMW25-15 as it has served its purpose of determining the thickness of the surficial aquifer. Has this been completed since?"

It has not been completed as of time of solicitation.

"It was stated that confirmatory soil samples were collected at the PO

Yard on Keesler AFB"

"Can AF please provide the sampling locations and subsequent results?" Information has been provided in the Installation AR #715.5.

"Q&A Response dated 12 Jan"

"Responses to questions (54 and 65) are in conflict with each other. One states that new PPQs are required the other states that previously submitted PPQs may be used. To reduce the burden to both offerors and government personnel PPQs should not be required in if a CPARS is available."

Please see response provided for question 5.

"Section L, 5) Volume 2- Factor 2 Past Performance, Paragraph e)

Experience in Contracts Subitem i) (1) page 10 of the draft."

"Remove the following statement/requirement. “The Offeror is responsible for substantiating this by submitting an invoice showing percentage complete of at least 80% for each individual contract. ” given the previous sentence, “Percentage complete is defined as the total amount of work completed on the contract.” which was restated in answer to question 53.

Work complete does not equate to invoicing especially on milestone based performance based contracts such as ORCs.

Offerors are not allowed to invoice for work in place and complete until after review and approval by multiple entities which often involves significant delays in invoice and cost recovery."

The statement will remain.

"Various Q&A responses"

"Request the Air Force reconsider its position on the requirement for both PPQs and CPARS. As stated in question 26 the purpose of the CPARS are to eliminate the need for PPQs and Offerors receive significant push back from clients in continually seeking PPQ evaluations for projects that have been evaluated previously and/or have CPARS. Requiring both documents for a solicitation burdens both the 8a offeror and government personnel familiar with the past performance and whom have already likely repeatedly provided evaluations."

Please see response provided for question 5.

Mississippi Group Optimized Remediation Contract at Columbus Air Force Base and Keesler Air Force Base

Request for Proposal Questions/Responses

"Draft L and M"

"Section L and Section M give different requirements for the Management Plan as it concerns communication. Section L wants team (internal) and stakeholder (external) communication described as part of quality control, while Section M wants team communication (internal) discussed as part of staffing management and stakeholder (external) communication discussed as part of our procedures/processes for high-quality deliverables. Furthermore, Section M mandates the order of information

(an instruction and does not specify evaluation criteria). Would the government confirm that breaking up internal and external communication as described in Section M was done purposefully? If not, would the government confirm that we can instead provide a comprehensive communication plan that addresses both internal and external communication in the procedures/processes section?"

Follow the requirements in the solicitation.

"Draft L and M"

"Simplify and coordinate requirements between L and M for Management Plan especially considering the limited page count available in Volume I."

Follow the requirements in the solicitation.

"Section M Sub-Factor 2"

"Within Section M Sub-Factor 2, the first bullet wants us to describe “effective and efficient management of the work in order to meet the requirements of the PWS including management of multiple and concurrent events,” while the fourth bullet wants us to describe “prime and subcontractor staffing management” in the procedures/processes section. Would the government please confirm that the first bullet refers to upper-level program management (corporate management) of the project that can include corporate subcontractor management, while the second bullet is meant to be a description of our project-specific staff management?"

Follow the requirements in the solicitation.

"Site Visit, SS028 , Q&A #86"

"The PWS requires that an SSI be completed at SS028 but Q&A #86 indicated that an SSI had already been completed at

Area B in 2024 and that a second SSI is anticipated for areas B and C. The 2024 SSI has not been provided/nor posted on the AR. Is the second SSI work in progress or is that intended to be performed under this new contract. As the SSI is a component of the performance objective, it is critical that the bidding contractors have documents related to all SSI work at

SS0028 or this creates a significant advantage to the incumbent."

The Draft Final HRSC (SSI) has been uploaded to the AR.

"Site Visit, SS028, Q&A 76/107"

"The Q&A indicated that a 2025 HRSC investigation will be made available and Q&A #107 states that this document is available on the AR. However, to date, this report has not been provided or posted to the AR. It is critical that bidders have this information available as soon as possible. Can posting of this information be expedited?"

Please see response provided for question 25.

"Site Visit, SS028 Q&A #66"

"The Q&A indicated that at a minimum a screening model will be needed to calculate VI in the buildings at SS028. Is it the

USAF expectation that VI risks to buildings within SS028 be characterized and assessed under this contract?"

Refer to PWS Section 1.2.7.1.1.

"PWS 1.2.7.1.3"

"Which CLIN will Base Boundary Well LTM be associated with?" Base Boundary well LTM is not associated to a specific Sub-CLIN but rathe associated with the LTM for the landfills

"LTM - IDW"

"Please provide most recent Waste Profile for LTM sites at both Keesler and Columbus." Profiling is part of the contract as requested by regulators. Recent profile unavailable.

"Keesler AFB"

"Please provide most recent Annual Report for LF003 to determine needs for the Methane Gas Collection System. Is the

System currently fully functional and running correctly?"

The 2024 Draft Final Annual Report is on the AR. The Methane Gas

Collection System is functional and operating as of November 2025.

"PWS Section 1.3.2(s) and Draft RFP QA #15"

"Are there specific soil COCs identified by regulatory agencies or AFCEC?" Specific soil COCs are identified by regulatory agencies.

"Tab C"

"If the joint venture has no financial activity or credit references, can the member’s financials be substituted for TAB C requirements?"

If the joint venture has no financial activity or credit references, then financ for each member of the JV must be submitted.

"Tab C"

"TAB C states a requirement for a list of present commitments for projects that have been accepted but performance has not begun. If a joint venture has none, does the government want to see those lists from the JV members?"

If the joint venture has no list of present commitments for projects that have been accepted but performance has not begun, then submit those lists from each JV member.

"Section 1.3.2"

"2 enumerated list “t” the contractor is asked to incorporate wells TMW25-20 through TMW25-26 into the monitoring program. These wells do not appear to currently exist. Does AF expect the contractor in install monitoring wells TMW25-20 through TMW25-26?"

Please see response provided for question 16.

"Within the conclusions section of the most recent SS025 semi-annual report (June 2024) in the AR, it is suggested to abandon monitoring well TMW25-15 as it has served its purpose of determining the thickness of the surficial aquifer. Has this been completed since?"

It has not been completed as of time of solicitation.

"It was stated that confirmatory soil samples were collected at the POL Yard on Keesler AFB. Can AF please provide the sampling locations and subsequent results?"

Information has been provided in the Installation AR #715.5.

"Responses to questions (54 and 65) are in conflict with each other. One states that new PPQs are required the other states that previously submitted PPQs may be used. To reduce the burden to both offerors and government personnel PPQs should not be required in if a CPARS is available."

Please see response provided for question 5.

"Section L, 5) Volume 2- Factor 2 Past Performance, Paragraph e)

Experience in Contracts Subitem i) (1) page 10"

"Remove the following statement/requirement. “The Offeror is responsible for substantiating this by submitting an invoice showing percentage complete of at least 80% for each individual contract.” given the previous sentence, “Percentage complete is defined as the total amount of work completed on the contract.” which was restated in answer to question 53. Work complete does not equate to invoicing especially on milestone based performance based contracts such as ORCs. Offerors are not allowed to invoice for work in place and complete until after review and approval by multiple entities which often involves significant delays in invoice and cost recovery."

Please see response provided for question 20.

"Request the Air Force reconsider its position on the requirement for both PPQs and CPARS. As stated in question 26 the purpose of the CPARS are to eliminate the need for PPQs and Offerors receive significant push back from clients in continually seeking PPQ evaluations for projects that have been evaluated previously and/or have CPARS. Requiring both documents for a solicitation burdens both the 8a offeror and government personnel familiar with the past performance and whom have already likely repeatedly provided evaluations."

Please see response provided for question 5.

"Section L and Section M"

"Section L and Section M give different requirements for the Management Plan as it concerns communication. Section L wants team (internal) and stakeholder (external) communication described as part of quality control, while Section M wants team communication (internal) discussed as part of staffing management and stakeholder (external) communication discussed as part of our procedures/processes for high-quality deliverables. Furthermore, Section M mandates the order of information.

Would the government confirm that breaking up internal and external communication as described in Section M was done purposefully? If not, would the government confirm that we can instead provide a comprehensive communication plan that addresses both internal and external communication in the procedures/processes section?"

Please see response provided for question 22.

"Section M Sub-Factor 2"

"Within Section M Sub-Factor 2, the first bullet wants us to describe “effective and efficient management of the work in order to meet the requirements of the PWS including management of multiple and concurrent events,” while the fourth bullet wants us to describe “prime and subcontractor staffing management” in the procedures/processes section. Would the government please confirm that the first bullet refers to upper-level program management (corporate management) of the project that can include corporate subcontractor management, while the second bullet is meant to be a description of our project-specific staff management?"

Please see response provided for question 24.

"Site Visit, SS028 , Q&A #86"

"The PWS requires that an SSI be completed at SS028 but Q&A #86 indicated that an SSI had already been completed at

Area B in 2024 and that a second SSI is anticipated for areas B and C. The 2024 SSI has not been provided/nor posted on the AR. Is the second SSI work in progress or is that intended to be performed under this new contract. As the SSI is a component of the performance objective, it is critical that the bidding contractors have documents related to all SSI work at

SS0028 or this creates a significant advantage to the incumbent."

Please see response provided for question 25.

"Site Visit, SS028, Q&A 76/107"

"The Q&A indicated that a 2025 HRSC investigation will be made available and Q&A #107 states that this document is available on the AR. However, to date, this report has not been provided or posted to the AR. It is critical that bidders have this information available as soon as possible. Can posting of this information be expedited?"

Please see response provided for question 25.

"Site Visit, SS028 Q&A #66"

"The Q&A indicated that at a minimum a screening model will be needed to calculate VI in the buildings at SS028. Is it the

USAF expectation that VI risks to buildings within SS-28 be characterized and assessed under this contract?"

Please see response provided for question 27.

"Site Visit Q&A #98"

". If the Draft Final Supplemental RFI report is not available at this time, can the AF at least provide the work plan for RFI in the

AR?"

The work plan for the RFI has been uploaded to the AR.

"Site ST008"

"Has benzene rebounded above the MCL at any site wells in 2025?" Reports for 2025 have not been received by AFCEC.

"The AF indicated in previous Q/A that information for new wells installed at ST008 would be provided. This information is not in the AR. Please provide."

Please refer to the final ST008 SRFI Work Plan provided on the AR for planned well details. Final report on well installation has not been received

AFCEC.

"Attachment 9 Schedule B"

"subCLIN 0038CA is for finalizing the documents remaining unfinished in the previous contract. Will the government please provide a comprehensive list of documents in AFCEC, MDEQ and any other review cycle at Keesler AFB and

Columbus AFB so that level of effort in this subCLIN can be determined?"

The Government will provide a comprehensive list of documents.

"Attachment L-1, 1), Labor Category Qualification Requirements, and 1.1, Key Personnel and Attachment 1, Performance Work

Statement, 1.3.2., Additional Scope Discussion and Limits, z."

"In Attachment L-1, Labor Category Qualifications, Section 1. Labor Category Qualification Requirements, it states, "With the exceptions of the Program Geophysicist for unexploded ordnance (UXO) and the Program Chemist, eight years of relevant experience may be substituted for a bachelor's degree."

In Attachment L-1, 1.1, Key Personnel, there are no required qualifications for a Program Geophysicist. Additionally, this position is not mentioned in the Statement of Work or in Sections L or M.

In addition, the Performance Work Statement states, "The Contractor shall NOT be responsible for: ... z. Remediation of sites with unexploded ordnance (UXO), Discarded Military Munitions (DMMs), munitions constituents (MCs) present in high enough concentrations to pose an explosive hazard, and chemical warfare material (CWM)."

Question: Could the Government please confirm that a Program Geophysicist for UXO will not be required for this contract?"

A Program Geophysicist for UXO is not required for this contract.

"Section L, 3)a)iii)(3) and Attachment L-1, 1., Labor Category

Qualification Requirements"

"Can the Government please confirm that manpower charts can be used to describe qualifications of key personnel as specified in Attachment L-1, Labor Category Qualifications?"

Follow the requirements in the solicitation.

"Section L, 5)(d)xi) and Attachment 16b, Past Performance

Questionnaire"

"In Section L, 5)(d)xi), the RFP states, "If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from an owner for a contract(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective contract(s)."

On the PPQ form provided, it states, "The information contained in the completed Past Performance Questionnaire is considered sensitive and cannot be released to us, the Offeror, or any other parties except the Contracting Officer and Contract

Specialist."

Issue: These instructions are inconsistent. One allows the Offeror to obtain a completed PPQ from a contract owner, while the other states that completed PPQs cannot be released to the Offeror.

Question: Could the Government please confirm the instructions in Section L, 5)(d)xi) are correct and that Offerors are allowed to obtain completed PPQs from contract owners and if unable to obtain prior to closing will provide the first page of the PPQ with the proposal?"

Offerors should request PPQs be submitted directly to the Government. If an offeror is unable to request the PPQ prior to the proposal due date, the first page of the PPQ with contract and client information must be submitted

"Section L, 5)d)xi)"

"In Section L, 5)d)xi), it states that Offerors shall include "a copy of the official CPARS evaluation. Interim CPARS evaluations are acceptable for contracts that have not been completed. A Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) must be completed and submitted."

In the draft version of this solicitation, this requirement stated, "If no CPAR evaluation is available, a Past Performance

Questionnaire (PPQ) must be completed and submitted."

Issue: Some Government clients will not fill out a PPQ when they have already completed a CPAR for a project.

Question: May Offerors provide a CPAR for Past Performance projects in the event that a client declines to provide a completed PPQ where they have already completed a CPAR?"

Please see response provided for question 5.

"Section L, 5)d)xi) and Section L, 5)f), Past Performance

Questionnaire"

"In Section L, 5)d)xi), it states that Offerors shall include "a copy of the official CPARS evaluation. Interim CPARS evaluations are acceptable for contracts that have not been completed. A Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) must be completed and submitted."

In Section L, 5)f), Past Performance Questionnaire, it states, "For all contracts submitted under Factor 2, a Past Performance

Questionnaire (Attachment A) and final CPARS rating must be completed and submitted. Interim CPARS evaluations are acceptable for contracts that have not been completed and are at least 80% complete."

Issue: As the solicitation currently reads, Past Performance projects without a CPAR cannot be used even if a PPQ can been obtained. The solicitation states that "CPARs ratings must be completed." Offerors have no ability to force their Government clients to complete and submit a CPAR into the Government system, and therefore Offerors should not be prohibited from using a project based on a requirement outside of their control.

Question: Could the Government please confim that a PPQ will suffice where a CPAR does not exist in order to support Past

Perfomance projects?"

Please see response provided for question 5.

"Section L, 3)a)iii)"

"Will the Government please allow for graphics and tables, to include the organizational chart, to be presented on an 11" x 17" and to only count as one page?"

The Government will allow each 11" x 17" page depicting figures, tables an exhibits to count as one page.

"Section L, 5)e)i)(1) and Section M, 4)ii)(2), Relevancy"

"Section L, 5)e)i)(1) states, "(1) Contracts submitted shall be completed, or substantially completed (80% or more), within the last five (5) years from the solicitation issuance date. Percentage complete is defined as the total amount of work completed on the contract. The Offeror is responsible for substantiating this by submitting an invoice showing percentage complete of at least 80% for each individual contract."

Section M, 4)ii)(2), Relevancy, states "Percentage complete is defined as the total amount of work completed on the contract."

Issue: Percentage of work completed as of the date of solicitation issuance (03/17/26) will include work physically performed as of this date. On projects that are not 100% complete, the issue with providing an invoice to substantiate this percentage is that the percent complete on an invoice will lag anywhere from three weeks to 45 days behind the percentage of work physically completed as of the date of the soliciation as Government contractors are only allowed to invoice once a month. For example, a project could be 81% physically complete as of 03/17/26, but the last invoice could potentially reflect

78% complete as of 02/28/2026.

Another example where using invoices can be problematic to substantiate the total amount of work completed is on performance-based remediation contracts (to include ORCs) where the contractor is required to meet the milestone prior to invoicing. For instance, when a report is not allowed to be billed until the final version has been approved. In this case, work completed is substantial on this milestone but the invoice will not substantiate it.

Question : In the event of a project that is not complete, could Offerors provide either an invoice or a PPQ from the client that substantiates that the total amount of work completed on the project is at least 80% complete or more as of the date of the soliciation (03/17/26)?"

"Attachment L-1 Labor Category Qualifications"

"Could the Government please confirm that "Key Personnel" from Attachment L-1 Labor Category Quals, Section 1 Labor

Category Qualification Requirements, 1.1 Key Personnel only include Program Manager, Program QA/QC Manager, Program H&S Manager, Program Chemist, MS Registered PG, and Public Affairs Officer (PAO) for Optimized Remediation

Contracts (ORC) Projects as well as 1.2, Project Manager?"

Follow the requirements in the solicitation.

"Section L, 5)(d)xi) and Attachment 16b, Past Performance

Questionnaire"

"In Section L, 5)(d)xi), the RFP states, "If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from an owner for a contract(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective contract(s)."

On the PPQ form provided, it states, "The information contained in the completed Past Performance Questionnaire is considered sensitive and cannot be released to us, the Offeror, or any other parties except the Contracting Officer and Contract

Specialist."

Issue: Assuming that the Government intends for Offerors to not be copied on PPQ correspondence between the

Government and contract owner, Offerors will not be able to tell if the Government receives the completed PPQ back from the contract owner.

Question: Should Offerors submit the first page of each Past Performance PPQ with their proposal by default?"

Offerors may provide the first page of the PPQ along with their proposal.

"Section L, 7)a)iii)"

"In Section L, 7)a)iii, the RFP states, "Each Offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP...iii) Certificate of Corporate Authority"

Issue: There was no Certificate of Corporate Authority provided with the RFP.

Question: Could the Government please provide this Certificate?"

It is the offerors resposibility to provide their Certificate of Corporate

Authority. Language in Section L has been updated.

"Statement of Objectives page 9 of 60 1st Paragraph under item

1.2.7 (3)"

"For Alternative Objective Site - were Sub-CLINs for Alternate Objective sites included in government ROM and will they be included in assessing the total value of the contract between submitted SOQs?"

All Sub-CLINs on the Schedule B have been accounted for.

"Statement of Objectives page 17 of 60 1.3.2 (f) "Management and disposal of IDW media with PFAS… No applicable site under this

ORC.""

"Please clarify if the statement, "No applicable sites under this ORC" is relevant to 1.3.2 (f)." No applicable sites under this ORC is relevant to PWS Section 1.3.2 (f).

"Statement of Objectives page 18 of 60 1.3.2 (f) "Disposing of on-site materials including: 2 large poly tanks, 8 drums of Neutral Zone, and 2 drums of existing IDW...""

"Has waste characterization occurred? Will sampling of the IDW be required? Are the poly tanks empty? What did/do they contain?"

Waste characterization has not occurred.The poly tanks are 2,000 gallons.

One has approximately 600 gallons of liquid that will need to be characterized and disposed of properly. It is unknown if the tank needs to be cleaned. The second tank will be RCRA clean.

"Statement of Objectives page 18 of 60 1.3.2 (t) "Redevelop/replace wells to maintain the well inventory identified in the LTM Plan...""

"Has the AR been updated and can copies of the LTM Plan(s) be provided for review?" LTM plans have been uploaded to the AR.

"Statement of Objectives page 21 of 60 4.1 "The Contractor shall prepare two whole document updates during the POP of the

ORC.""

"Is the ORC Transition Plan considered the second whole document update of the PMP? Or are both whole document updates for the PMP included in CLIN 0001CB and the ORC Transition Plan is a separate document under CLIN 0001CC?"

The ORC Transition Plan is a separate document under Sub-CLIN 0001CC

"Statement of Objectives 8.8 Hazardous Waste Remvoal and

Support"

""The Contractor shall destroy, recycle, and dispose of hazarouse wastes and materials…"

Please confirm this requirement only applies to the sites listed in Table 1."

This requirement applies to sites listed in Table 1 and work listed under

Section 1.3.2 of the PWS.

"Section L Instructions to Offerors page 9 of 15 e.i.1 - "Contracts submitted shall be completed, or substantially completed (80% or more), within the last five (5) years.""

"Based on the nature of government contracts, does 80% include optional years? For instance, a contract may be for five(5) years with a one (1) year option but it is unknown at 80% if the options will be exercised."

Contracts submitted shall be completed, or substantially completed (80% or more) of the awarded amount.

"Section L Instructions to Offerors page 9 of 15 e.i.1 - "Contracts submitted shall be completed, or substantially completed (80% or more), within the last five (5) years.""

"Based on the nature of these contracts and the requirement for 80% complete, would the government consider extending the age of projects from 5 to 7 years?"

Follow the requirements in the solicitation.

"8.3"

"Upon review of the PWS, construction and demolition activities are referenced several times throughout the document. Can the Gov’t confirm if construction and demolition tasks are included as part of the requirements for this contract?"

The Government cannot confirm if construction or demolition will be needed or not.

69 "RFP Letter 2; Section L 2, 3(a)(ii); Section M 1.0"

"Proposal Validity Period – Conflicting Requirements: Section L, p.2 and Section M refer to a 365-day validity period;

the RFP Letter (Para. 2) states 280 days. Which validity period should be committed to in Volume IV/Section A?"

Please see response provided for question 7.

70 "Section L, Table 1, 3(a)(ii)(2)-(3), 5(a)"

"Page Limits for Volumes: Section L, Table 1 lists a 15-page limit for Volume II Past Performance, but excludes certain elements, and also lists various exclusions (tables, figures, PPQs, schedules, etc.). Can the Government confirm that only the narrative counts toward the 15-page limit, and that all tables, figures, summary charts, CPARS reports, and other listed exclusions (including proof of relevancy and teaming agreements) are excluded?"

Please see response provided for question 2.

71 "Section L 4(a)(i), 6, PWS 4.2"

"Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) Submission Formats: Section L (§4(a)(i)(a)) requires the IMS in MS Project and

Excel, while Section L/III (Price Vol) expectations and PWS (§4.2) prescribe certain formats and columns. Can the

Government confirm (a) IMS deliverable formats required at proposal submission, and (b) that proposal IMS (narrative and schedule) may be summarized vs. formal PMP/IMS format post-award?"

The IMS deliverable formats required at proposal submission are MS Projec and Excel. The IMS must be a formal IMS and not summarized.

72 "RFP Letter 2"

"Funding Availability and Award Timeline: The RFP Letter notes “Funds are not presently available for this effort,” and refers to the possibility of cancellation. Will the Government provide periodic updates regarding funding status? What is the anticipated date for funds availability/award after proposal submission?"

No, the Government will not provide periodic updates regarding the funding status. The solicitation includes the 52.232-18 availability of funds clause. Date of funds availability is pending.

73 "PWS 3.0; Section L 4(b)(v); Table of Enclosures"

"Requirements for Attachments and Enclosures: The PWS refers to “Enclosure 3 – NOT APPLICABLE” under

GFI/GFP and elsewhere expects GFP management to be addressed in proposals (Section L §4(b)(v); PWS §3.0). Please clarify if any Government Furnished Property will or will not be provided and if Enclosure 3’s status is correct."

Government Furnished Property will not be provided. Status of Enclosure

3 is correct.

74 "Section M Table 3; Section L 5(e)(ii)"

"Past Performance Evaluation - Use of “Very Relevant”: Section M Table 3 defines a “Very Relevant” rating for contracts, but Section L (§5(e)(ii)) does not specify the minimum threshold for contract selection for “very relevant.” Can the

Government clarify the level of similarity/complexity required to achieve a “Very Relevant” rating?"

There is no minimum threshold for contract selection for "very relevant" rating. Please see requirements in Sections L and M.

75 "PWS 4.13, 4.14"

"Access Concerns - Scheduling/Delays: PWS Section 4.13, 4.14 details base-specific access (flight lines, escorting, safety, background checks, etc.), which may induce schedule delays. Will the Government grant equitable adjustments for lost/idle time due to access delays or flight scheduling beyond contractor control?"

The successful offeror will coordinate all activities in advance and operate i accordance with their approved Work Plan.

76 "Section L Table 1, throughout"

"Clarification of Required Proposal Tabs/Volumes: Section L has some ambiguity between the table and “subfactor” references. Can the Government confirm all required major sections, tabs, and any prescribed order/formats for each

The Government has verified Section L contains all required major section, tabs, and any prescribed order/formats for each volume.

"Att 4a, L1, Draft Labor Categories" "Public Affairs Officer requirements state that a degree in Journalism, Public Affairs is relevant; would the govt accept a BS in

Environmental Biology and 10 years experience in community involvement?"

A degree in journalism, public affairs or related field is required.

"Volume IV Contract Requirements" "Per the Government's requirement: "(4) A list of present commitments to include all projects that have been accepted but performance has not begun. This list shall include the dollar value thereof, the name of the organization under which the work is being performed, and a description of the work being performed. Include names and telephone numbers of personnel within each organization who are familiar with the prospective contractor's performance." We respectfully request clarification regarding the definition of "present commitments" where "project have been accepted but performance has not begun". Specifically, does this requirement pertain to:

(a) All current projects that have been awarded to the contractor, regardless of whether Notice to Proceed (NTP) has been issued, or

(b) Only those projects that have been awarded but are pending issuance of NTP (i.e., no work or mobilization has commenced)?

Clarification on whether the list should include only those projects for which contract award has occurred but where

All current projects that have been awarded to the contractor, regardless of whether NTP has been issued.

"Section L. Volume II, f) Past Performance Questionnaire, pg 11" "The Govt states "for all contracts submitted under Factor 2, a Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment A) and final

CPARS rating must be completed and submitted. Is it a requirement to submit both a PPQ and a CPARS rating with each project?"

Please see response provided for question 5.

"Att 1 PWS 1.3.2 F" "Section F indicates "The following sites are validated PFAS sites; therefore, the Contractor shall test waste media for PFAS and dispose of it in accordance with the guidance. No applicable sites under this ORC." but the next line (g) indicates "The

Contractor shall test IDW for PFAS using EPA test method 1633 as required for waste acceptance. This includes, but is not limited to sites LF009 etc." For clarification, Does line g indicate PFAS is suspected but not validated according to f?"

PFAS at legacy sites listed under PWS Section 1.3.2.g has been identified in waste media due to migration of PFAS from PFAS validated sites; therefore the IDW needs to be handled accordingly.

81 "Sec L Past Performance Past Performance Questionnaire"

"Past Performance Questionnaires: Will the Gov't accept a previously completed PPQ that has been filled out and is in the standard USACE format?"

See answer to Question 6.

82 "PWS Table 1 Pg. 13"

"In Table 1, four sites are listed under Columbus AFB requiring Tech Memo reports. Section 1.3.2 e (Additional Scope

Discussion and Limits) cites a requirement for one Tech Memo Report per installation. Please clarify if this requirement is in addition to the four sites listed in Table 1. If so, how many other sites in addition to the four listed in Table 1 are anticipated to require preparation of Tech Memo reports?"

Per PWS Section 1.3.2.e, one Tech Memo report should be submitted to include the two sites in Table 1.

83 "Attachment 9 - Schedule B"

"Please confirm that pricing for sub-CLINS 0009AA and 0009AB are expected to include the preparation and submittal of a total of four Tech Memo Reports (one per site as listed for Columbus AFB in PWS Table 1)."

Per PWS Section 1.3.2.e, one Tech Memo report should be submitted to include the two sites in Table 1.

84 "General"

"Please ensure that all recent documents related to the sites included in the ORC are provided on the Admin Record." All recent draft final and final documents related to the sites are included in

AR.

85 "Section L, V2, Item e"

"The text in paragraph (i) and (1) use the term "Contracts", but based upon the text, it is likely more appropriate to substitute the word "Project" or "Task Orders"."

The language will not be changed.

86 "Attachment 16a-L1, Item 1.2 Project Manager"

"There are three categories for Project Manager. Will a higher score be achieved if the Offeror provides a Sr. Project Manager?

It is assume that the requirement is not asking for three individual staff that each fit one of the three categories (Jr., Mid. Sr.)."

No.

87 "Section L, V2, Factor 2, Item d - General Instructions"

"For subitem xi, please verify if a PPQ is required if we have a final CPARS for our Past Performance Project? Typically, Past

Performance is demonstrated either by a Final CPARS or a PPQ, but not both."

Please see response provided for question 5.

88 "1. CLIN0004CA - 0004CA -"

"Update Community Involvement Plan (OY2) - Columbus AFB: The AR show the most recent CRP/CIP for Columbus

AFB is the Final Community Relations Plan dated December 2018 . Can you please confirm whether 2018 is the latest approved CIP/CRP, or if any interim updates (formal or informal) have been issued since then?"

Please see response provided for question 10.

89 "CLINs 0022CA/CB/CC and 0004CA/CB/CC"

"Please confirm whether TRC meeting support is expected for CLINs 0022CA/CB/CC and 0004CA/CB/CC, or whether the contractor should price these CLINs using a no ‑event assumption (no TRC, no public meeting) unless AFCEC directs otherwise."

Follow instructions under PWS Section 1.3.2.j

90 "Follow-up to Q#86 RFI, SS028"

"The response to question #86 of the RFI indicated that a second SSI is anticipated for Area B and Area C. However, none of this information is available on the AR. This puts non-incumbant bidders at a significant disadvantage, since the PO is to perform a SSI but it is not known what already has been done and what the findings were. Please provide these reports."

Please see response provided for question 25.

"Section L, Instructions to Offerors, 3)a)iii)(2)"

"Section L, Instructions to Offerors, 3)a)iii)(2) states. "The page limitations for Volume II [emphasis added] exclude past performance questionnaires (PPQs), CPARS reports, invoices, table of contents, schedule, cover page and/or letter, acronym table, figures, tables, exhibits, and summary table. Volumes III and IV do not have page limitations. Text should be at least size

12 font, single spaced. Font limitations do not apply to charts, tables, and figures, but font must be legible." Please identify the exclusions for Volume I as well, including whether tables and figures count, given the limited number of pages (15) allowed currently per Table 1."

Please see response provided for question 2.

"PWS Table 1, ST008"

"The last sentence of Section 6 (Conclusions and Recommendations) of the 2024 Draft Final Interim Measures Progress

Report for ST008 states, " The next sampling event is scheduled for June 2025. " Please provide the sampling results from this periodic event. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

Please see response provided for question 46.

"PWS Table 1, LF004 aka LF001 LTM"

"Please provide the June 2025 performance monitoring data for LF004 aka LF001. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

Please see response provided for question 46.

"General / PWS 4.6.1 - Tier 1 Partnering Meetings and Minutes"

"Please provide the the last year's worth of, or at least the latest, minutes for the monthly Tier 1 partnering meetings held between the incumbent, AF, and regulators for CAFB and KAFB. These minutes are not currently in the online AR.

Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to this information."

Minutes for the latest Tier 1 partnering meetings have been loaded to the AR

"PWS Table 1, SS028, SS032, SubCLINs 0019AE (Achieve

RODA) and 0020AE (Achieve RODA)"

"Is the offeror responsible for performance of the public participation requirements associated with a ROD Amendment, as part of the AO objective for SS028 and SS032, under CERCLA and the NCP?"

Yes.

"PWS 1.3.2u"

"Please provide a list, including location coordinates and site association, of monitoring wells for each installation that are to be comprehensively assessed. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to this information."

Well inventory for both istallations has been uploaded to the AR.

"PWS Table 1, LF004 aka LF001 LTM"

"Please provide the June 2025 performance monitoring data for LF004 aka LF001. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

Please see response provided for question 46.

"PWS Table 1, LF003 LTM"

"Section 3.6 of the Draft Final 2024 LTMR for LF003 states, " The methane extraction system is not currently operational, and severe corrosion of several components has rendered it ineffective at extracting methane from the collection line." It goes on to say that, "The methane extraction system repairs... will be performed in accordance with the Methane Extraction System

Rehabilitation Work Plan (APTIM, 2024). " Has the methane extraction system been repaired and made operational?

Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

Please see response provided for question 30.

"PWS Table 1, LF002 LTM"

"Section 3.12 of the 2018 FYR for Keesler AFB states, " The next FYR [for Site LF002] is scheduled to be completed in

December 2024 ." Please provide the 2024 FYR. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

The last FYR for Keesler was done in 2018. A FYR was not conducted in

December 2024.

"PWS Table 1, LF002 LTM"

"Please provide the October 2025 performance monitoring data for LF002. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

Please see response provided for question 46.

101 "PWS 6.1, 6.1.2, 6.2" "Does the Health and Safety Plan require regulatory review?" No.

"PWS 3.0"

"Has an Information Repository been established for Columbus Air Force Base? If so, where is it located?" Per Section 4.5 of the PWS, the development of the information repository will be the responsibility of the awardee.

"PWS 3.0"

"Has an Information Repository been established for Keesler Air Force Base? If so, where is it located?" Per Section 4.5 of the PWS, the development of the information repository will be the responsibility of the awardee.

"PWS Table 1, SS025 RC/RA-O"

"Please provide the performance monitoring data from October 2024 and June 2025 for SS025. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to this information."

Final monitoring data for October 2024 has been uploaded to the AR. The draft final monitoring data for June 2025 has been uploaded to the AR

"PWS Table 1, LTM at CAFB"

"Have the recommendations in Section 6 (Recommendations) of the last available performance monitoring report (annual

2023) for the Base Boundary Wells; LF005, LF007, and LF012; LF006; and LF009, LF010 been implemented? Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

The recommendations have not been implemented at this time.

"PWS Table 1, ST007 LTM"

"Have the recommendations of the 2024 ST007 Draft Final Supplemental RCRA Facility Investigation - Arsenic

Background Study been implemented. Offerors need this information to prepare requirement fulfilling, competitive bids and to remove concerns regarding unequal access that the incumbent currently has to these data."

They have not been implemented as of the date of the solicitation.

"Attachment 4, Section L, Instructions to Offerors, Section 4.b.v"

"What GFE and/or GFP will successful offerors be responsible for managing under this contract? Enclosure 3 was not provided; it is listed as "NOT APPLICABLE" in Section 1.2 of the PWS."

Government Furnished Property will not be provided. Status of Enclosure

3 is correct.

"PWS Table 1, CIP"

"Does the CIP require regulatory review, i.e., should offerors plan for 3 document versions: Draft, Draft Final, and Final?

Table 1 offers conflicting directives. The Performance Period cell identifies 3 versions while the Performance Standard cell identifies only AF approval."

The CIP does not require regulatory review. However 3 document versions are still required.

"PWS Section 1.3.2.k"

"Previous Keesler LTMP Reports states Access Restriction signs being present at LF002, LF003, and LF004. How many

Access Restriction signs are present for each Landfill site?"

There are no access restriction signs at Keesler AFB landfill sites.

"Schedule B, Well Replacement at CAFB and KAFB"

"For the Perform Well Replacement CLINs at CAFB (0008) and KAFB (0027) and their 2 well sCLINs (CA to CK), will this require regulatory involvement? If this task is not aligned with the ongoing LTM or RA-O programs for a specific site, will we need to prepare regulator approved work plan memos and installation memos?"

Yes.

"PWS Table 1, ST008"

"Draft RFP QnA No.22 asked for the results report for the activity described in AR 685.0 (MSE. 2020. (MSE Group, LLC).

Final Work Plan, Remedial Action at Site SWMU 66 (ST008) Building 4038, Active Military Gas Station, Keesler AFB.

December). The Govt's response to Draft…