B.08.03_Amendment_1.pdf

W911KB19R0016

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUNDS) Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP) OB/OD Area Military Munitions (MRS) MRS-04, Former Fort Glenn, Umnak Island, Alaska, FUDS Project Number: F10AK029804is being amended to clarifying parts of the PWS, Section L, Section M, add clauses 52.204-8 and 252.204-7007, and close Q&A.

Proposals are due March 25 and 9:00 a.m. Alaska Standard Time.

Please, be sure that proposals have been recieved by christopher.e.taylor@usace.army.mil and/or timothy.l.clapp@usace.army.mil.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 85

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 12-Mar-2019

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W911KB19R0016

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Feb-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

11-Mar-2019

CODE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, AK

CEPOA-CT (W911KB)

PO BOX 6898

JBER AK 99506-0898

W911KB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 21-Mar-2019 09:00 AM to 25-Mar-2019

09:00 AM.

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

The following have been modified:

11 March 2019

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

SUBJECT AND LOCATION: Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP) OB/OD AREA Military Munitions Site (MRS) MRS-04, Former Fort Glenn, Umnak Island, AK, FUDS Project Number: F10AK029804

The government has a Right-of-Entry (ROE) for the project site and the ROE will be provided to the contractor after award. The contractor is not to perform any fieldwork without a government supplied, duly executed ROE. The Government will provide an update of the status of executed ROEs prior to award.

The Government expects to secure all ROEs required for performance of the tasks as described in this PWS well in advance of any scheduled field work. The Contractor shall not access the parcels without an executed ROE. Any required permits or coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) or land owner will be performed by the Government. The USACE Range Support Center is providing technical assistance as required by USACE requirements.

1.0 OBJECTIVE

The objective for this contract is to perform a Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP) Remedial Action (RA) for the Munitions Response Site (MRS) OB/OD AREA (MRS-04) located at Former Fort Glenn, Umnak Island, AK (FUDS Project Number: F10AK029804). As used in this document, the term Munitions and Explosives of Concern (MEC) includes Discarded Military Munitions (DMM) and Unexploded Ordnance (UXO), and Munitions Constituents (MC) in high enough concentrations to pose an explosive hazard. All work under this contract shall be completed in accordance with all applicable Department of the Defense (DoD) and Army policies, regulations, and guidance, and Federal, State and local laws. The Remedial Action Objective for MRS-04 is to reduce the potential for direct contact with MEC by human receptors, considering the current and future land use (Note: 2016 MRS-04 Decision Document, Section 2.10.5: The selected remedy is surface removal, focused subsurface removal, and land use controls (LUCs). No additional investigation for MC is required).

2.0 SCOPE

The Contractor shall, in accordance with the terms and conditions more particularly set forth below, furnish all labor, management, facilities, supplies, equipment, transportation, and material (other than those to be furnished by the Government as hereinafter provided), and do all things necessary for, or incidental to, performance of the work. The Contractor shall furnish to the Government, reports and other data together with supporting material developed during the period of service. During the progression of the work, the Contractor shall provide adequate professional supervision and quality control to assure the accuracy, quality, completeness, and progress of the work.

The scope of the RA will consider applicable and appropriate DoD, Army, and USACE guidance and policy for MMRP response actions. Site-specific reference and policy documents include, but are not limited to, the following:

• USACE guidance on ordnance and explosive response actions under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) for Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS).

• USACE EM 200-1-15, Technical Guidance for Military Munitions Response Actions (30 October 2018).

• USACE EM 385-1-97 w/C (12 April 2013), Explosives Safety and Health Requirements Manual

The tasks identified in this PWS include performing a Remedial Action at the Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS) OB/OD AREA (MRS-04), Former Fort Glenn, Umnak Island, AK, FUDS Project Number:

F10AK029804. The selected remedy for the OB/OD Area (MRS-04) consists of a surface removal over the entire 337 acres (100-percent coverage), a focused subsurface removal to the depth of detection over 30 acres, and LUCs to increase awareness of potential risks through administrative and institutional controls. LUCs will cover the entire MRS-04 (337 acres). (Reference 2016 Decision Document, Sections 2.10.5/2.13.1)

The remedial action objective (RAO) for OB/OD Area (MRS-04) is to reduce the potential for direct contact with MEC by human receptors, considering the current and future land use.

The contractor’s Technical Approach for subsurface removals may propose the use of conventional methods, digital geophysical methods (DGM), advanced geophysical classification (AGC), or a combination of methods to remove explosive hazards for evaluation by the Government. For the proposed method, the contractor must provide detailed justification why, and how, their approach and selected method(s) will result in the best value to the government. The contractor shall state the probability of detection for all proposed technologies.

Furthermore, based on the 2016 Decision Document, No Further Action is the selected remedy for the surrounding site, Remaining OB/OD Area MRS-14 (1,739 acres). No CERCLA action is necessary for MRS-14 since no evidence of munitions or explosives of concern were observed within this area during the remedial investigation.

3.0 BACKGROUND

3.1 Safety. MEC may exist on property formerly occupied or leased by the DoD. MEC is a safety hazard and may constitute an imminent and substantial endangerment to personnel and the local population. The work required under this PWS falls under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program - Formerly Used Defense Sites (DERP-FUDS). USACE conducts environmental response activities at FUDS in accordance with Engineer Regulation (ER) 200-3-1 (May 10, 2004), DoD Manual (DoDM) 4715.20, Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) Management (March 9, 2012), and the approved Decision Document. USACE is conducting these activities in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Sections 104 and 121; Executive Order 12580; and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). Required safety documents for review and approval prior to fieldwork shall include site-safety and accident prevention plans, and required munition response explosive safety submittals. All activities involving work in areas potentially containing MEC hazards shall be conducted in accordance with Army and DoD requirements regarding personnel, equipment and procedures.

Federal Regulation 29 CFR 1910.120 (HAZWOPER) applies to all actions taken at the site.

3.2 Location. The former Fort Glenn is located on the eastern end of Umnak Island in the Fox Islands of the Aleutian Island Chain of Alaska. Umnak Island lies approximately 50 miles southwest of Dutch Harbor and 850 miles southwest of Anchorage, Alaska. See Figure 2-1 from the Decision Document (USACE, 2016). The Fort Glenn installation has been abandoned since it was excessed in 1955 and remnants of hundreds of structures are scattered over the 102,000-acre former installation.

There is a system of cinder roads throughout the former installation, some of which are in reasonably good shape for vehicular traffic. Three cinder runways are also present, one of which was regraded during the RI and is suitable for light aircraft. The only occupants at the former installation are employees of the Bering Pacific Ranches Limited, which has leased the property since 1993. Their ranch house and slaughtering facility is located in the middle of the former Fort Glenn installation. Although Umnak Island is remote with no towns or cities on the eastern end of the island, public access is not restricted and is open in many areas. There is a landing beach on the east coastline at Otter Bight.

The OB/OD Area is located in the southeastern portion of the former Fort Glenn installation. Based on the Remedial Investigation (RI) recommendations, USACE completed an administrative delineation of the Fort Glenn OB/OD Munitions Response Area (MRA) (2,076 acres) for project management purposes. The delineation supports the DoD requirement to maintain an accurate inventory of sites suspected of containing MEC or munitions debris (MD). The original OB/OD Munitions Response Area (MRA) was divided into 2 separate projects consisting of the OB/OD Area (337 acres) which is the subject of the MRS-04 Decision Document, and the Remaining OB/OD Area (MRS-14) (1,739 acres) which is addressed under a separate Decision Document (and not part of this scope). The entire 2,076-acre MRA including both the OB/OD Area and Remaining OB/OD Area is currently owned by the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. The site vicinity consists of small gently rolling hills on the northeast and southwest sides with a small valley in the center. In MRS-04, two distinct clusters of suspected demolition craters were identified in historical aerial photographs. The largest craters are located at approximately N 53° 22′ 56″ W 167° 56′ 51″, and the other craters are located approximately

0.5 mile to the southeast. These two clusters of demolition craters are identified as the Focus Area and consist of approximately 30 acres.

3.3 History. Fort Glenn was established in 1942 as a 102,062-acre Army Airfield and defense garrison to support the United States Naval Base at Dutch Harbor. In June 1942, Fort Glenn helped defend Dutch Harbor against a Japanese attack. The Fort Glenn facility consisted of numerous structures including quonsets, revetments, metal sheds, hangars, reinforced concrete buildings, pump houses, ammunition magazines, and three runways. The main cantonment area included three volcanic cinder runways surrounded by hangars and hardstands to park planes. The hardstands were shielded from high winds by large horseshoe-shaped earthen berms and/or they were constructed below the surrounding grade. Most structures at Fort Glenn utilized one of these forms of wind protection. Twelve camps, north and east of the runways, were part of the main cantonment area. These camps were used by infantry, field artillery, coast artillery, medical corps, finance department, ordnance department, quartermaster corps, chemical corps, chaplain corps, and the Army Air Forces. Warehouse storage, ammunition magazines, concrete bunkers, a Post Exchange, theater, hospital, and technical support facilities were also located within the main cantonment area. Fort Glenn was placed in caretaker status by late 1944 after the Japanese were driven from the Aleutian Islands. On September 18, 1948, Fort Glenn was officially redesignated as Cape Air Force Base (CAFB). The new mission of CAFB was to provide facilities, services, and assistance for transient aircraft and personnel, air communications services, and weather squadrons. Fort Glenn was relinquished to the Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management between 1952 and 1955 and subsequently transferred to numerous owners including the State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and made available for selection by native entities under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1981. Currently, the overall FUDS property is owned by the Aleut Corporation, the St. George Tanaq Corporation, the Tanadgusix Corporation (TDX), the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The former Fort Glenn is currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In 2008, an eruption of Mount Okmok resulted in lahar being deposited across the former Fort Glenn, including approximately 70 acres of the OB/OD Area. Lahar thickness ranges from a few inches to over 4 feet.

3.4 Current and Potential Future Land and Resources Uses. Current activities at the site include agricultural (free range cattle grazing), recreational (hunting), and nearby residential. Potential future activities are the same, with the addition of residential use within the site boundary. For the current activities, potential exposure to MEC or MC would primarily be at the surface. For the future residential scenario, exposure to subsurface soil or MEC items during excavation activities is also possible.

3.5 Chemical Warfare Material (CWM). The project area for MRS-04 is not suspected to contain Chemical Warfare Materiel (CWM). However, if suspect CWM is encountered during any phase of site activities, the contractor shall immediately withdraw upwind from the work area, secure the site and contact USACE. The contractor shall maintain site security while waiting for written direction by USACE regarding the procedure to be followed for performing further RA work or response actions at the site.

3.6 Summary of Remedial Investigation Results

The Remedial Investigation (USACE, 2012) findings are summarized below:

(MRS-04) (337 acres) and the Remaining OB/OD Area (MRS-14) (1,739 acres).

Site Features: The site consisted of the remnants of old roads, 19 visible demolition craters, a lahar flow that covered portions of the site including several demolition craters, a large cantonment area, and storage quonsets. There are gently rolling, grass covered hills on the northeast and southwest sides of the site and a small valley through the central portion of the site. Deep drainages with steep slopes are present along the north and in the southern portion of the site.

Access: Unrestricted, but access is very limited based on difficulty of traveling to the island.

Geophysical Investigation Results: 3,250 anomalies in a total of 9.04 acres of DGM transects and grids.

Intrusive Investigation Results: A total of 293 selected target anomalies were intrusively investigated. Of these, 222 anomalies resulted in 425 MD items. Eight anomalies resulted in the recovery of 89 MEC items. Outside of the lahar impacted area most items were found between 0 and 1-foot bgs. Inside the lahar impacted area, items were found between 0 and 4 feet bgs. However, based on the size of the filled demolition craters, items could be deeper than 20 feet bgs.

MEC/MD: A total of 102 MEC items were disposed within the OB/OD Area (MRS-04) during this RI. 89 MEC items were the source of eight selected target anomalies. An additional 13 MEC items were recovered from surface locations. No MEC was identified in the Remaining OB/OD Area (MRS-14).

Incidental MC Sampling: Soil sampling was completed around damaged MEC items to determine if incidental MC had been released into the surrounding soil. Surface soil was investigated using a combination of incremental and discrete samples. Discrete subsurface soil samples were also collected adjacent to discovered MEC items. Three COPCs for human health risk assessment were identified (TNT, copper, and lead) and three COPECs for ecological risk assessment were identified (copper, lead, and zinc). All COPCs and COPECs were detected in discrete samples adjacent to discovered MEC.

Human Health Risk Assessment: Human health risks were evaluated for the site worker, recreational user, and future resident scenarios were presented in the RI Report.

Ecological Risk Assessment: Ecological evaluation has concluded it is unlikely that incidental MC poses potential risks to ecological receptors.

MEC Hazard Assessment (HA) Baseline Level: The OB/OD Area (MRS-04) has a MEC HA level of 1 (865 points).

Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol (MRSPP) Priority: The OB/OD Area (MRS-04) has an MRSPP Priority of 3.

RI Conclusions and Recommendations The OB/OD Area has been adequately characterized during the RI. Based on the RI results, there is a potential for exposure to MEC hazards by current or future agricultural, commercial, recreational, and residential receptors at the OB/OD Area (MRS-04). There is no incidental MC risk for the current or future agricultural, commercial, or recreational receptors. Risk associated with incidental MC are considered to be low for future residential receptors and result from localized detections around discovered MEC items.

The results of the RI were used to provide the following recommendations:

1) Boundaries for the OB/OD Area (MRS-04) and the Remaining OB/OD Area (MRS-14) are presented in the Decision Documents.

2) An FS for MEC/MD at the OB/OD Area (MRS-04) was recommended (and later completed).

3) No Further Action for the Remaining OB/OD Area (MRS-14).

4.0 CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

Pre-Bid Site Visit. A pre-bid site visit will not be conducted by the Government. There is a Remedial Investigation Report, Proposed Plan and Decision Document, Explosive Siting Plan (ESP), and other related documents available as Government Furnished Information.

Contractor’s Responsibility to comply with applicable requirements. The Contractor shall ensure that all work performed under this contract is in strict compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, agreements, or policies. The Contractor shall ensure that all activities performed by its personnel, subcontractors and suppliers are executed in accordance with said authorities. Any incident of noncompliance noted by the Contractor shall immediately be brought to the attention of the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). Nothing in this contract shall relieve the Contractor of its responsibility to comply with applicable laws and regulations. The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining all permits, licenses, approvals, and/or certificates required or necessary to accomplish the work requirements. When the work to be performed requires facility clearances, such as digging or drilling permits, the Contractor shall obtain such clearances and/or permits prior to any drilling or excavating operations. The Contractor shall be responsible for locating all utilities, if applicable, in the work area. Active utilities shall be avoided; any damage to active utilities by the Contractor shall be reported immediately to the USACE PM and COR, and must also be repaired immediately by the Contractor at no additional cost to the Government.

4.1 Project Management Plan (PMP) / Quality Assurance Surveillance Project Plan (QASP)

(Task 1)

PMP:

The Contractor shall develop and maintain a detailed PMP in both draft and final approved versions. The PMP shall specify the schedule, general technical approach, resources, and communication required for the planning, execution, and completion of the tasks outlined in the PWS. The first draft of the PMP shall be due within thirty (30) calendar days of award and shall include a proposed payment milestone plan. The draft PMP, proposed payment milestones, and subsequent revisions shall be subject to USACE review and approval, through the COR. The final PMP shall be due within 30 calendar days of receipt of COR comments on the draft PMP.

Activity Based Schedule:

Within the PMP, the Contractor shall develop and maintain an Activity-Based Schedule that fully supports the technical approach and outlines activities and milestones defined at the appropriate detail level and logically sequenced to support and manage completion of the performance objectives in this PWS. Additionally, the due dates for all payable deliverables shall be identified.

A payment plan shall be included with the schedule that may allow for payments to the Contractor based on successful completion of interim milestones proposed by the Contractor. The

Contractor shall also coordinate activities with the USACE Project Manager (PM) to ensure that the proposed project schedule does not conflict with other Contractor activities on site.

Project Status Reports:

The Contractor shall prepare monthly status reports consisting of a brief summary of work that has been performed, work underway, work planned for the upcoming month, status of laboratory reports and data received outstanding laboratory reports or other outstanding data, communications from USACE, monthly exposure hours, pay estimates and associated work summaries. Each status report shall state whether current work is on schedule. If the work is not on schedule, the Contractor shall state what actions are anticipated in order to get back on schedule.

QASP:

The contractor shall prepare a draft Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) which follows the approach taken (analog, DGM, AGC, or combination). A Draft QASP template is provided by the Government as a starting point in Attachment E. The Contractor shall develop a draft QASP to reflect the methodologies developed and approved during the Technical Project Planning (TPP) process. The contractor shall prepare the QASP in accordance with current guidance and templates provided.

The QASP will be finalized by the government to include appropriate QASP content and QA requirements. The government geophysicist will revise the QASP to ensure that appropriate QA measures are included and followed.

The Contractor shall be evaluated periodically during performance of this PWS to ensure compliance with the proposed and accepted performance goals, regulations, guidance and Data Item Descriptions (DIDs), and to document that acceptance criteria (AC), delivery schedule, and the overall completion date are being met. This evaluation will be performed according to a QASP. The Government will finalize the Draft QASP after the TPP process and draft UFP-QAPP to reflect the Contractor’s proposed process and quality control procedures. This final QASP will be supplied to the Contractor and used by the Government to evaluate the Contractor’s performance. Failure to adequately complete any service or submittal to at least a satisfactory level of quality or timeliness may result in a repeat of the work, or a poor performance evaluation, or both.

The QASP sets forth the procedures and guidance that the COR will use in evaluating the technical performance of the contractor in accordance with the terms and conditions of the PWS. The QASP objective is to define Government procedures that will be used to verify that the appropriate performance and quality assurance (QA) methods are used. The purpose of the QASP is to ensure that the performance of specific activities and the completion of milestones are accomplished in accordance with all requirements set forth in this PWS.

The QASP details how and when the COR will monitor, evaluate, and document Contractor performance of the PWS. The QASP shall highlight key quality control activities or events that the COR will use to determine when USACE (COR or Contracting Officer (KO)) inspections are conducted to assess progress toward and/or completion of milestones. Activities identified in the QASP should be appropriately coded in the project schedule to allow for planning of QA inspections. The QASP must also address QC Seeding and QA Third Party Seeding requirements.

4.2 Work Plan and Appendices (Task 2)

The contractor shall prepare and submit a Draft, EMCX Review Draft, Draft Final and Final RA Work Plan. The RA Work Plan shall be in the UFP-QAPP format and shall define project objectives and associated data needs to reach project closeout, describe Data Quality Objectives (DQOs), and contain the updated Conceptual Site Model (CSM).

Governmental acceptance is required for all planning documents. The Government’s acceptance of planning documents will indicate only that the general method of work, materials, detailing, and other information are satisfactory and appear to comply with the contract objectives. Acceptance will not relieve the Contractor of the responsibility to comply with the contract requirements, for any errors that may exist, and compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. The Contractor is responsible for the satisfactory completion of all work. No work at the site shall be performed until the Planning Documents are accepted by USACE.

Work Plans must consider potential impacts to biological and cultural resources. Avoidance of cultural sites is the first choice for all remedial actions. If the objectives of the RA cannot be accomplished without disturbing the cultural resources, the contractor will notify USACE. USACE will coordinate the potential impact with the proper State or Federal agencies. If cultural resources are encountered during the project, the Contractor shall immediately notify their USACE on site representative or Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and follow the cultural resource management plan reporting protocols.

The work plan shall include equipment, methods, and staffing to perform the following tasks:

• Review the previous documents developed for the site and incorporate relevant information into the RA Work Plan.

• Gather site-specific data to further define the nature and extent of MEC contamination as needed to complete the PWS tasks.

UFP-QAPP:

The contractor shall prepare a Draft, EMCX Review Draft, Draft Final and Final UFP-QAPP in accordance with the Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans (UFP-QAPP) requirements and format. This plan will be prepared in accordance with the Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5, December 2002 and the UFP-QAPP Manual and Worksheets.

Sampling may be required due to blow-in-place and consolidated shots to demonstrate regulatory compliance. Note that no additional investigation for munitions constituents is required, and the sampling and analysis requirements for potential blow-in-place or consolidated shot operations will be determined in the TPP process along with regulatory requirements.

Technical Project Planning (TPP):

The contractor shall work within the framework of the TPP process to finalize the work plan, UFP- QAPP, and other required plans prior to the start of field activities.

The contractor shall use the TPP process to assist the Government in obtaining consensus on specific Data Quality Objectives (DQO), measurement criteria, classification processes, verification processes, and classification performance assessment, as applicable depending on the methods proposed.

The Contractor shall propose DQOs necessary to achieve the performance standards. The proposed DQOs shall be based on the Contractor’s proposed and accepted technical approach.

The Contractor shall plan for meetings to occur at critical decision points in each of the TPP phases.

After each TPP meeting the Contractor shall submit meeting minutes and prepare a TPP memorandum or addendum to a previous TPP memorandum that documents all Project Delivery Team (PDT) decisions and agreements. The contractor shall organize and coordinate all TPP meetings; identify and involve all stakeholders, upon approval by the Government; and be responsible for the logistics of these meetings to include, but not limited to, providing a facilitator, obtaining meeting location, and sending invitations (pending Government review and acceptance). The Contractor shall prepare, submit for review and gain acceptance of a TPP memorandum or addendum for each meeting.

If a site visit is planned prior to acceptance of a Work Plan, the Contractor shall prepare and submit for acceptance an Abbreviated Accident Prevention Plan (AAPP).

The contractor shall achieve the objectives of each TPP phase as listed in Engineer Manual 200-1-2, Technical Project Planning Process, EM 200-1-15, and applicable Interim Guidance Documents. The contractor shall facilitate meetings in a professional and organized manner. Archeological and sensitive site locations shall not be released to the public without written permission from the USACE;

this information will be provided to the contractor. Property owner privacy shall be preserved. Private property owner names shall not be included or disseminated in any documents.

Quality Control and Quality Assurance:

The QAPP will outline the contractor’s Quality Control and Quality Assurance measures. All procedures for samples collected and analyzed for MC shall be addressed and identified in the UFP QAPP. Note that sample collection and analysis will only occur if during the TPP process that it is decided that blow-in-place sampling or sampling for consolidated shots is required.

All documents shall adhere to document version and respond to USACE and regulatory agency comments requirements located in Section 6.7 of this PWS. The RA Work Plans shall be in UFP- QAPP format and adhere to CERCLA substantive requirements. Note: One ARAR is RCRA Subpart X, Miscellaneous Units, Section 264.601 for use of consolidated shots to dispose of MEC.

All MEC shall be destroyed within the MRS in which it was found. Demolition operations must be conducted using the procedures within the most recent edition of TM 60A-1-1-31, EOD Disposal Procedures. MEC shall be destroyed as soon as possible after its discovery; ideally near the end of the same work day. If the disposal work cannot be performed on the day of discovery, then the MEC shall be guarded until it can be safely destroyed by qualified contractor UXO personnel.

Note: The contractor shall perform QC seeding for MEC detection and removal in accordance with EM 200-1-15, rev 30OCT2018. Quality Assurance (QA) seeding will be performed by a separate contractor.

4.2.1 Explosives Safety Submission (ESS). The contractor shall assume that intrusive investigations will be conducted under the RA, thus an ESS will be required for review and approval by the DDESB. The contractor must submit the ESS in accordance with EM 385-1-97 w/C1, Appendix V for review and approval. The contractor must provide an After-Action Report (AAR) as required by DoD 6055.9, Volume 7, Para V7. E4.7, formatted according to EM 385-1-97, Errata Sheet 3, Appendix Y once all work has been completed or when directed by USACE. The AAR will be used to close out the Explosives Safety Submission (ESS).

4.2.2 Conceptual Site Model. The contractor will update the CSM in the UFP-QAPP, to include the following elements:

• Identify past munitions related activities, including manufacturing, handling, storage, use, and disposal

• Determine expected MEC contaminants

• Determine the most likely primary and secondary release mechanisms

• Determine potential migration pathways

• Identify exposure pathways for current and reasonably anticipated future land uses.

The CSM may be submitted in graphical, tabular, or text forms; however, the USACE prefers either of the first two approaches. The CSM will be included as an appendix to the RA Work Plan and revised in the RA Report.

4.2.3 Accident Prevention Plan. The contractor shall prepare an Accident Prevention Plan (APP) to include all the necessary Activity Hazard Analyses (AHA) relevant to site operations. The APP will be prepared as an appendix to the RA Work Plan or as part of the Health and Safety Plan in accordance with EM 385-1-1.

4.2.4 Project Quality Control Plan (PQCP). The contractor shall prepare a Project Quality Control Plan (PQCP) that will address all quality control methods to be used to control MEC activities on the project. The PQCP will discuss how the contractor intends to implement the three phases of control for all site operations, including the QC personnel proposed and their qualifications. The PQCP will be prepared as an Appendix to the RA Work Plan.

4.2.5 MEC Management and Contingency Plan. The contractor shall prepare as an appendix to the RA Work Plan, a MEC Management and Contingency Plan that describes, at a minimum, MEC/anomaly avoidance procedures and accounting processes, for site access and potential blow-in-place (BIP) - MC sampling. Accounting processes shall be designed to ensure tracking and custody of all MEC items from field identification to future final disposal

4.2.6 Other Relevant Planning Documents. The contractor shall prepare the following additional planning documents, based on knowledge of site conditions provided by the previous site-related documents and the site-specific RA requirements: Environmental Protection Plan, Waste Minimization Plan, MEC Anomaly Avoidance Plan, and Cultural Resources Plan. Other planning documents may be required and will be discussed during TPP meetings. A Public Involvement Plan already exists for the property (USACE, 2015) and will be updated by USACE.

4.2.7 New guidance for Risk Management Methodology at FUDS MMRP Projects was issued on 3 Jan 2017 for the purpose of providing information to support risk management decisions, developing remedial action objectives, and to provide a basis for assessing achievement of remedial action objectives relative to acceptable end states. While the remedial action objectives for the MRS has been set forth in the Decision Document, this new methodology must be completed with project data to document achievement of the remedial objectives and acceptable end states.

For remedies that incorporate Educational Awareness Land Use Controls, the remedy is considered to be at Response Complete (RC) following the first completed round of all approved educational activities.

After the documentation of the implementation and evaluation of effectiveness of the Educational Awareness activities have been submitted and accepted by USACE, the remedy would be complete and all future rounds of Educational Awareness activities would be conducted as part of the long-term management (LTM) phase.

After the documentation of the implementation and evaluation of the effectiveness of the Educational Awareness activities have been submitted and accepted by the USACE, the remedy would be complete and all future rounds of educational awareness activities would be conducted as part of the long-term (LTM) phase.

4.3 RA Field Activities (Task 3)

4.3.1 Site Preparation. The contractor shall perform necessary site preparation to adequately support the field work and sampling methodology in the approved UFP-QAPP. Procedures and equipment requirements shall to be approved by the USACE PM prior to execution. The requirements of Section 6 GIS of the April 2017 Manual for Electronic Deliverables (MED) are applicable to this contract. Existing built up areas shall be utilized to the extent practicable. However, the contractor shall be prepared to create access roads and staging areas to complete the field work. Site improvements shall be thoroughly documented (GPS locations, photographs, etc.). The contractor shall remove newly-created access roads and staging areas and restore the impacted area to the extent practicable (no seeding required). In order to prevent the propagation of invasive species, no seeding or fertilization will be required. Best management practices will be used to control erosion at the site.

4.3.2 Government Representatives. The contractor shall plan housing, meals, and onsite transportation for up to six (6) government representatives (QAR, Archaeologist, OESS, Geophysicist, Other) and three (3) 3rd party QA field team members. Quarters for government personnel shall be properly heated, lighted, and ventilated. The Contractor shall allow for change-out of the Government personnel approximately every two weeks during field work. The contractor shall also provide transportation from Dutch Harbor to Fort Glenn. Charter aircraft flights for government personnel shall be DoD Commercial Review Board approved under Public Law 99-661 and DoD Directive 4500.53. For planning purposes, assume 6 changeout flights for personnel. Assume 2 government representative (QAR and archaeologist) will be onsite during the entire fieldwork duration. Assume 2 government representative may be onsite periodically for site visits. Assume 2 government representatives (OESS and geophysicist) will be onsite for 2 week duration. Assume the 3rd party QA field team will be onsite for 3 week duration. The Government will provide transportation for its personnel to/from Dutch Harbor or other commercial hub used by the Contractor and meals/lodging while the personnel are in Dutch Harbor/other commercial hub.

4.3.3 Location Surveys and Mapping. The contractor shall perform location recording and mapping using techniques that allow easy data conversion to state plane coordinates. The contractor may use established control monuments, however, should the contractor select to set any property boundaries or monuments, this work shall be performed by a Professional Land Surveyor licensed in Alaska. Contractor personnel who are knowledgeable and competent in land surveying and use of surveying equipment may perform grid and/or transect location and layout. The contractor shall prepare all location data and submit following completion of the work. Survey data shall include, at a minimum, a drawing and spreadsheets of survey information. For each site, the drawing shall cover the entire site and include grids or transects obvious MEC locations, and other pertinent features.

The contractor shall prepare a map and spreadsheet, which includes a list of coordinates for corners, starting, ending, turning locations, reference monuments used in survey, and other pertinent features of grids or transects.

4.3.4 Detector Aided, Surface Removal. The contractor shall conduct detector-aided, surface removal at the MRS across the whole MRS. The surface clearance shall extend through the vegetative mat to the mineral soil (rock/cobble) surface. The surface at Fort Glenn is defined as the mineral soil surface. The mineral soil surface begins at the base of the tundra or vegetative root mat. The size criteria for surface clearance is 2"x2" surface area of MEC, Munitions Debris (MD) or Range Related Debris (RRD)

4.3.5 Focused Subsurface Survey and Removal. The contractor shall perform a subsurface removal action on 30 acres of the MRS. To the maximum extent practicable, the contraction should conduct the field investigation by gathering digitally recorded or advanced geophysical classification data in addition to all other data that is digitally recorded and geo-referenced for each item recovered.

All geophysics shall be in accordance with EM 200-1-15 and (interim and final) guidance from ESTCP.

The contractor shall employ the Geophysical Systems Verification (GSV) concept in accordance with “A Physics-Based Alternative to Geophysical Prove outs for Munitions Response, Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), July 2009; amended September 2015” and install an Instrument Verifications Strip (IVS) using anomaly avoidance techniques, test their system(s) and write an IVS Report for review by the USACE and Stakeholders. An IVS Memorandum will be received by the USACE within one week of the IVS’s installation and equipment verification for review by the USACE Geophysics personnel. As part of QC requirements of the GSV, the contractor shall install blind seeds. All seed locations shall be surveyed with locations having centimeter accuracy. Placement of seeds shall be at variable depths and orientations but no deeper than can be reliably detected using advanced EMI sensors. Upon acceptance of the geophysical data by USACE, the contractor shall initiate subsurface clearance activities and report the results in tabular format.

4.3.6 Instrument Functional Checks. For the RA, the contractor needs to verify and document instrument serviceability using a setup and function check prior to start of the work. The contractor shall also conduct personnel checks. Thereafter, a daily pre- and post- operation functional check of the detector, daily periodic verification of the accuracy of the positioning method, (e.g., GPS, wheel mode, fiducially) and daily QC of the data processing shall be required.

4.3.7 MEC Accountability. The contractor shall propose a method for maintaining a detailed accounting of all MEC items/components, if any, encountered during the RA. This accounting shall include the amounts of MEC, nomenclature and condition, location and orientation of MEC, and a photograph. This accounting shall be a part of the MEC Management and Contingency Plan as an Appendix to the RA Report.

4.3.8 Munitions Constituents Sampling and Analysis Activities. The contractor shall propose a plan to collect surface samples from a depth of 0 to 6 inches as warranted due to blow-in-place procedures, consolidated shots and/or soil removals, if determined to be required during the TPP process and UFP-QAPP document reviews. The laboratories shall provide analytical results within 30 days of sample receipt. The contractor shall be responsible for quality control planning and implementation, performing data validation, and for the electronic data deliverable (EDD). The contractor shall provide an EDD of the laboratory data in accordance with applicable requirements.

4.3.9 Sample Location Selection. The contractor shall propose a methodology for selecting sample locations to meet the needs of the RA, as required. Samples will be collected utilizing anomaly avoidance procedures.

4.3.10 Analytical Methods. Samples shall be analyzed in accordance with the most current and approved methods for explosives and MC metals.

4.3.11 Laboratory Qualifications. The laboratory used should have experience in handling military munitions samples. The analytical laboratory should be identified in the proposal and must be identified in the UFP-QAPP and hold applicable state certifications to perform the analytical methods required. The laboratory shall be DoD ELAP accredited for appropriate analyses.

4.3.12 Sample Location Data. Contractor shall position sample locations using Global Positioning System (GPS) or other location mechanism with a horizontal accuracy of 1 foot. The contractor shall prepare a drawing and spreadsheet of sample location information (name, coordinates), and submit it as part of the MC Data Package within the RA Report. This same information will be included in the initial project Geographic Information System (GIS). This requirement is if MC sampling is required due to BIP or consolidated shot activities.

4.4 Establish and Manage Project Geographic Information System (GIS) (Task 4)

The contractor shall establish an initial project GIS and incorporate data from Site Inspection (SI) and RI activities. The contractor shall submit the GIS data in a format compatible to the ESRI (ArcGIS) system and the Alaska District 2017 MED. The contractor shall incorporate layers that overlay on maps of the site that identify physical, cultural, biological and ordnance related items found during the investigation.

Examples include: real estate parcel boundaries, positively identified MEC, positively identified archeological sites, and environmental samples. A GIS map layer generated in ArcMap that includes physical (human-made) features overlaid onto the geophysical data results shall also be included. The contractor shall provide the collected data using 2017 MED WGS 1984 lat/long in decimal degrees (horizontal) and NAVD 88 in feet (vertical)

4.5 RA Report (Task 5)

The contractor shall prepare a comprehensive RA Report describing the scope of the project, the rationale and data used to arrive at conclusions and recommendations and the QA/QC procedures utilized to check assumptions and verify findings. The RA Report shall include the appropriate portions of the work plan to ensure the entire project will be understood without frequent reference to additional documents. The contractor shall provide detailed maps of the site(s) illustrating site boundaries, resources, structures and other site-specific details. The RA Report shall compile and analyze defensible data in clear and concise charts and graphs to support findings and recommendations, including explanations understandable to non-engineer professionals. The RA Report should anticipate stakeholder concerns and preemptively address them, reference applicable regulations and guidance and provide well-articulated and defensible justifications for recommendations.

The contractor shall prepare a Draft, EMCX Review, Draft-Final, and Final RA Report. The contractor shall receive comments on both draft versions of the document, prepare a “Response to Comments” table and address all comments received from the Government and other parties reviewing the report.

If conflicting comments are evident, the contractor shall identify those comments to the Government for resolution.

The RA Report shall document the results of the remedial actions completed. At a minimum, the RA report must include:

• A description of the historical activities potentially resulting in the presence of MEC

• Current, and reasonably anticipated future land uses and associated activities

• A description of the MEC, MD and MC encountered at the site and methods and actions taken during the RA.

• Completed and signed Material Documented As Safe (MDAS) disposal certificates and receipt documents, waste manifests, validated analytical data for confirmation and waste characterization samples, and geographic information system (GIS) location data

• A brief description of the site setting, including regional and site-specific geologic and hydrogeologic information

• An updated/revised CSM, including a description of the primary source, release mechanism, and exposure pathways

• A description of pathways of migration and exposure to the MEC

• Documentation of actions taken to achieve the RAOs of the Decision Document

• An identification and description of potential human and environmental receptors

• The results of the initial munitions hazard screening

• Updated MRSPP score

• A recommendation on what, if any, further action is warranted.

• Field documentation, log books, and photo-documentation of the site and work

Note: GIS generation and deliverables shall follow the Manual for Electronic Deliverables (MED) requirements, dated April 2017.

Major elements of the RA Report include (but are not limited to):

• Executive Summary

• Review of Existing Information Data Collection Activities Archive Search Report Site Description, Operational History Results of Preliminary Assessment

• Discussion and Results of RA Work Revised CSM Survey design and methods Assess potential MEC risks/hazards Results of the initial munitions hazard screening

• Conclusions and Recommendations

Potential or existing MEC risks/hazards Recommendation for future action, consistent with ER 200-3-1.

4.6 After Action Report (AAR) (Task 6)

Prepare an After-Action Report (AAR) to close the ESS as required by DoD 6055.9, Volume 7, ParaV7.E4.7 once all work has been completed the MRS identified under this contract.