RFQ Event #259 Specifications for PCBs consultant services.pdf

Department of Environmental Quality RFQ Event # 259

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) consultant services

1. Purpose The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is requesting quotes for Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) consultant services, as further detailed below.

The contact for this RFQ is:

Tessa Stevens

(208) 373-0473 tessa.stevens@deq.idaho.gov

2. Background Please see Scope of Work attachment for detailed background information.

3. Time lines Quotes Due on January 23, 2024 by 5:00 p.m. MT

4. Scope of Work See Exhibit A Contractor will coordinate with the Agency contact to determine project timelines. Agency contact is: Todd Higens

(208) 666-4631 todd.higens@deq.idaho.gov

5. Award Basis Award will be made to the responsive responsible vendor with the lowest Total Cost, as provided on Exhibit B, Price Sheet.

6. Response

Enter your Total Cost on Exhibit B, Price Sheet, and fax, e-mail, mail, hand-deliver/courier or submit your quote via IPRO (IPRO LOGIN) so that it is received at DEQ prior to the deadline established above.

Quotes submitted by any means other than IPRO must be accompanied by a signed State of Idaho Signature Page.

Quotes must include all Required Submittal Items (See below).

If submitting via IPRO enter your Total Cost on Exhibit B AND in IPRO, and UPLOAD all Required Submittal Items.

List of Attachments Required Submittal Items https://solutions.sciquest.com/apps/Router/SupplierLogin?CustOrg=StateofIdaho%20

Exhibit A – Scope of Work Exhibit B – Price Sheet State of Idaho Signature Page

Exhibit B – Price Sheet State of Idaho Signature Page (for manual submissions) Qualifications and References

Exhibit A

Scope of Work for

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) consultant services

1. Background

In Washington State, sections of the Spokane River are on Washington’s EPA-approved 303(d) list of impaired waters for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The impairments are due to exceedances of WA’s Human Health (fish tissue) Criteria for PCBs, not due to exceedances of the WA Aquatic Life Criteria for PCBs. However, the Idaho portion of the Spokane River from Coeur d’ Alene Lake to the Idaho/Washington border is not currently 303(d) listed with PCBs as a pollutant against Idaho’s Water Quality Standards and meets Idaho’s water quality criteria.

In lieu of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), WA Department of Ecology (Ecology) followed a “Straight to Implementation” PCB reduction strategy that included the Spokane River Regional Toxics Task Force (SRRTTF) to locate and identify sources of PCBs in the watershed and to implement PCB reduction strategies in WA. After over a decade of litigation initiated by the Sierra Club, Center of Environmental Law and Policy, and the Spokane Tribe of Indians, a complaint was settled alleging the EPA failed to uphold the federal Clean Water Act with respect to TMDLs on PCB-impaired reaches of the Spokane River in Washington. Under the settlement decree, the EPA is obligated to issue the TMDLs for PCBs in the Spokane River in Washington by September 30, 2024.

2. Current EPA TMDL Status

The EPA has assembled a team for development of the Spokane River PCB TMDL and is expected to meet a deadline of September 30th, of 2024. The technical team is currently evaluating existing PCB data, which includes data collected under the SRRTTF efforts. No additional PCB data will be collected under the TMDL process. While the SRRTTF has identified hot spot sources/areas of PCB contamination, EPA has stated the TMDL will address impaired segments that are independent of the Task Force study area. The TMDL will address sources of PCBs coming from Idaho and must provide assurance for protection of downstream water quality standards. From an EPA document entitled Considerations for the Development of Multijurisdictional TMDLs

(EPA 2012):

Section 303(d)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act and EPA’s regulations (130.7(c)(1)) require the TMDL to be established at a level necessary to attain and maintain the applicable narrative and numeric water quality standards. EPA interprets these provisions to include protection of downstream and adjacent water quality standards. This interpretation is consistent with the requirement that permit limits in upstream States also protect downstream and adjacent State water quality standards. This is usually accomplished by developing the TMDL to protect the most stringent standard.

3. Problem

The state of Washington Human Health Criteria for PCBs is 7 pg/L and the Spokane Tribe of Indians Human Health Criteria is 1.3 pg/L which are both below laboratory detection limits and below the best available technology to treat PCBs. EPA TMDL team is calculating PCB loads and allocations for the Spokane River based on these criteria. It is likely that Idaho dischargers will be held to the 1.3 pg/L criteria which is an unrealistic target to reliably measure or reach through treatment.

EPA is using a mass balance modeling approach to develop PCB loads for Idaho at the Idaho/Washington border.

The current EPA mass balance model considers PCBs as a conservative constituent passing through the riverine system of the Spokane River with no attenuation in sediments or biomass, no losses to ground water in losing reaches of the river, no dilution from groundwater in gaining reaches of the river and no consideration for any other factors that may bind, sorb or remove PCBs from the Spokane River. Furthermore, the EPA mass balance approach to modeling PCBs does not factor the possible PCB background levels from atmospheric deposition in Coeur d’Alene Lake that likely already exceeds Washington criteria thresholds.

4. Purpose

Idaho DEQ staff is lacking the expertise to properly evaluate and possibly contest the methodologies EPA is using to calculate PCB loads in the Spokane River TMDL. As a result, Idaho DEQ requires the professional services of a PCB expert who can serve as a contractor to assist Idaho DEQ with answering questions about the fate and transport of PCBs in the Spokane River and help with drafting formal comments addressing the limitations and concerns Idaho may have with this PCB TMDL.

5. Scope of Work and Deliverables

Review of Relevant Data:

Evaluate and analyze the SRRTTF (Spokane River Regional Toxics Task Force) and EPA PCB data used for the Spokane River TMDL.

Provide a comprehensive report on the quality, accuracy, and relevance of the data.

Review of EPA Presentations:

Examine three EPA public presentations outlining the TMDL approach for the Spokane River.

Summarize and provide written report on key points, methodologies, and any relevant information presented.

Keep up to date on all relevant EPA developments and participate in webinars and other informative information sessions as they become available. For example, information about an upcoming webinar can be found at: https://www.epa.gov/ tmdl/spokane-river-pcb-tmdls.

Evaluation of TMDL Development Comments:

Analyze comments and concerns related to TMDL development submitted to EPA by the Idaho DEQ.

Provide a detailed assessment of the validity and significance of these comments and concerns.

Supporting Basis for Comments and Concerns:

Where appropriate, offer a supporting basis for the comments and concerns raised by DEQ.

Provide evidence, data, or scientific rationale to strengthen the position of DEQ.

http://www.epa.gov/

Identification of Unaddressed Topics and Issues:

Identify topics or issues within EPA’s TMDL approach and mass balance methods that may not have been recognized by DEQ.

Highlight areas of concern that should be brought to the attention of DEQ.

Assistance in Reviewing Comments to be Submitted to EPA:

Collaborate with DEQ in reviewing written and oral comments intended for submission to EPA.

Provide expertise to enhance the quality and effectiveness of the comments.

Adaptability to Evolving Needs:

Acknowledge the potential for evolving needs as the PCB TMDL nears completion.

Demonstrate flexibility in adjusting deliverables based on data availability and changing requirements.

Timely Reporting:

Provide regular updates on the progress of the review and analysis.

Deliver interim reports and a final comprehensive report within agreed-upon timelines.

Communication and Collaboration:

Establish clear channels of communication with DEQ staff.

Collaborate effectively with DEQ personnel to address any emerging issues during the review process.

Documentation and Reporting:

Maintain thorough documentation of the review process, methodologies employed, and findings.

Generate clear and concise reports summarizing the key deliverables and recommendations.

6. Bids

Below is a suggested format for a bid or proposal document for the specified deliverables. This format includes key sections such as an introduction, understanding of requirements, approach and methodology, timeline, team qualifications, and cost.

Bid for PCB Expertise on Spokane River TMDL Review

1. Introduction:

Provide a brief overview of your company, its expertise, and experience in PCB analysis and environmental assessments.

2. Understanding of Requirements:

Confirmation of understanding of the deliverables outlined in the Request for Quote (RFQ.)

Acknowledgment of the evolving nature of the project and commitment to adaptability.

3. Qualifications:

Brief bios and qualifications of key team members who will be involved in the project.

Highlight relevant experience in PCB analysis, TMDL reviews, and collaboration with environmental agencies.

Describe your company’s ability to:

- Review SRRTTF and EPA PCB data.

- Analyze EPA public presentations on the TMDL approach.

- Evaluate TMDL development comments and concerns.

- Provide a supporting basis for comments and concerns.

- Identify unaddressed topics and issues in EPA’s TMDL approach.

- Assist DEQ in reviewing comments to be submitted to EPA.

- Provide professional services as needed.

4. Availability:

Demonstrate that your company has the capacity to complete each deliverable, taking into account the evolving nature of the project.

Include estimated milestones, checkpoints, and interim reporting dates.

5. Cost:

Provide a breakdown of the costs associated with your services including estimated hours for deliverables and hourly rates. Include indirect costs such as overhead or administrative costs as a separate line item.

Provide a transparent and itemized budget, including labor, materials, and any other relevant expenses.

6. Communication Plan:

Outline how communication will be handled throughout the project.

Designate a point of contact for regular updates and issue resolution.

7. References:

Provide references from previous projects that demonstrate your company’s capability in similar undertakings.

8. Additional Information:

Any additional information relevant to your proposal that enhances its comprehensiveness and persuasiveness.

Exhibit B

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) consultant services Price Sheet

This Price Sheet must be submitted with your quote, whether the submission is manual or electronic through the Idaho eProcurement System (IPRO).

Name of Vendor:

Provide your TOTAL COST (use fully burdened hourly rates, etc. as appropriate for services), meeting the Scope of Work outlined in Exhibit A. Your TOTAL COST must be fully burdened to include all costs associated with providing the services and meeting the required Scope of Work, to include any implementation or other requirements.

TOTAL COST for Service:$

Please provide a cost structure/table for unit pricing and extended prices, as appropriate.

Company Name:

Contact Name/Phone:

Contact E-mail:

RFQ Event #259 Specifications for PCBs consultant services