Questions and Answers V2 RA001 Amendment 0004.pdf

Questions and Answers

W911S626RA001

W911S626RA001 (Amendment 0003)

Question 1: In PWS Section 3.2 (Facilities), it states the Government will provide facilities as identified in Technical Exhibit 1. On that Facility Diagram, please note that the incumbent contractor purchased and currently owns the two buildings labeled "office" and the building labeled "single wide." Please advise if the Government will be purchasing them or will the solicitation be updated?

Government Answer: The Government will not be purchasing the incumbent-owned facilities.

The solicitation has been updated via Amendment 0001. Please see the revised PWS Sections

3.2 and 3.3, as well as the updated Technical Exhibit 1, for the revised facility and utility requirements.

Question 2: Is this a new requirement or a follow-on (recompete) to an existing contract?

If there is an incumbent, please provide the current/previous contract number.

Government Answer: This is a follow-on requirement. The previous contract number for these services is W911S621C0003. However, offerors are strongly cautioned that the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and solicitation instructions have been significantly updated for this acquisition (including Contractor-Furnished Facilities, CMMC/cybersecurity requirements, and the pricing structure). Offerors must base their proposals strictly on the current solicitation and its attachments, rather than historical data.

Question 3: In Evaluation criteria, the key personnel are identified as three positions;

Project/Site Manager, RCRA Specialist, CAA Specialist. In the referenced PWS section, there is an additional position, Alternate Project / Site Manager (Contract Manager). Can the government clarify if the Alternate Project / Site Manager (Contract Manager) is a key position along with the Project/Site Manager, RCRA Specialist, CAA Specialist?

Government Answer: Yes, the Alternate Project/Site Manager is considered a Key Personnel position. The omission of this position in the evaluation criteria was an administrative error.

Through Amendment 0003, the Government has updated the evaluation criteria in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 to include this position. Additionally, PWS Sections 1.6.10 and

1.6.10.1 have been updated to explicitly clarify the qualification requirements for the Alternate Project/Site Manager.

Question 4: PWS section 5.19 is not provided in the PWS. It is required to be addressed by the Section 2: Groundwater Monitoring Program Approach requires offerors to describe detailed technical methodology for executing a complete groundwater monitoring event (PWS 5.19). Can the government provide this PWS section?

Government Answer: Yes. PWS Section 5.10 (DTTF Inspection) was inadvertently omitted from the body of the original PWS document, which caused a numbering discrepancy for the subsequent sections. Through Amendment 0003, the Government has issued a revised

PWS and Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) matrix that re-inserts Section 5.10 and corrects the numbering for Sections 5.18 through 5.22. This correction shifts the Groundwater Monitoring Program to PWS 5.19. Offerors shall use the revised PWS and PRS provided in Amendment 0003, and the solicitation instructions referencing PWS 5.19 remain correct.

Question 5: Can the Government clarify the CLIN structure for Groundwater Monitoring?

Are routine semi-annual groundwater inspections supposed to be priced under the Base Sustainment CLIN, leaving only the "complete Groundwater Monitoring Event" (PWS 5.19) to be priced under the separate optional CLIN?

Government Answer: Yes, the semi-annual groundwater monitoring as referenced in the PWS Section 5.3.1.1 should be priced in the base effort. Yes, the effort defined in PWS Section 5.19 should be priced as an option.

Question 6: Are drums and containers reimbursable to the contractor, or must the contractor provide all containers and build those costs into their Firm-Fixed-Price proposal?

Government Answer: The Contractor must build those costs into their Firm-Fixed-Price proposal.

Question 7: Is the contractor required to provide their own heavy equipment for this contract, specifically including Heavy Mobile Equipment (HMED) and a pump truck for oil?

Government Answer: Yes.

Question 8: How are drums and personnel tracked (e.g., E-CAS, spreadsheets, QR codes)? Is the contractor required to provide their own software/IT system for tracking waste and personnel, or will the Government provide access to an existing system?

Government Answer: The government is in the process of transitioning to the government HMID system. The contractor is responsible for their personnel. To track waste through the facility (operating record) and personnel time/attendance the contractor will provide their own computer systems and software as appropriate.

Question 9: Who is explicitly responsible for generating the labels on the drums—the Government generator or the Contractor?

Government Answer: The Contractor is responsible for labels and material on contract.

Question 10: Can the Government clarify the standard process for handling oil and anti-freeze? For example, is anti-freeze pumped into drums? Is oil hauled exclusively in trucks, or in drums as well?

Government Answer: The contractor makes this determination, as they are the responsible party; whatever is required to comply with appropriate EPA and State waste regulations.

Question 11: Can the Government provide a brief summary of the contractor's responsibilities regarding DLADS coordination (pick-up, transport, and offsite processes)?

Government Answer: The contractor is responsible for generating waste ownership documents and coordination with DLADS.

Question 12: Are there any specific operational distinctions or separate tracking/billing requirements the contractor needs to be aware of when servicing Air Force facilities versus Army facilities on the installation?

Government Answer: No separate tracking/billing.

Question 13: Can the formal and informal generator training (PWS 5.12) be conducted via a hybrid or remote/virtual format, or must it be conducted 100% in-person?

Government Answer: Either format is acceptable.

Question 14: With the new Title V permit coming up in July, does the Government expect any significant changes from the 2019 permit that would impact the contractor's proposal?

Government Answer: While the Government does not anticipate sweeping changes to the Title V permit, there is one known addition expected: new leak checking requirements for all refrigeration units containing HFCs (15 pounds or greater with a Global Warming Potential of 53 or above). Currently, 13 units have been identified that meet this requirement. A complete inventory is still being gathered, and the Government anticipates this number will increase.

Additionally, regarding the upcoming RCRA Part-B permit renewal, offerors are advised that it is impossible to predict potential input or additional requirements from the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC).

Question 15: Can the Government provide clarification concerning the processes for emergency destructs at the DTTF, witness burns, and how DPG notifies the state?

Government Answer: In Module V of the Part B permit.

W911S626RA001 (Amendment 0004)

Question 16: Overall PWS Changes: There have been several changes to the PWS from the 2021 Version. Does DPG have the additional requirements added it can provide separately?

Government Answer: The 2026 PWS increases the contractor's responsibility in several technical and administrative areas. You should base your proposal on the 2026 PWS only.

Question 17: Landfill Permit and Overall Compliance (PWS Section 1.2 Background) DPG has incorporated the English Village Landfill Permit 9615R3 into the PWS. The PWS states that the Contractor is ultimately responsible for compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and Army requirements, whether services are performed by the Contractor or a subcontractor. Does overall landfill compliance (including operations, permitting, and regulatory adherence at Dugway Proving Ground) fall under the PWS requirements, or is the Contractor responsible for independently ensuring full compliance with the landfill permit?

Specifically, please clarify the Contractor’s responsibilities regarding:

• 5.3.1.1 – Landfill Semi-annual Groundwater Sampling Procedures (Does this fall under Table 2 optional events?)

• Salvage and Recycling requirements?

Government Answer: The Environmental Support Contractor is responsible for assistance with overall environmental compliance for DPG including permitting assistance of the English Village Landfill. The Contractor is responsible for ensuring execution of the assigned PWS, which reflects Utah law and Dugway’s specific landfill operating permit. The physical operation of the landfill is tasked to the BaseOps contract.

• Groundwater Sampling (5.3.1.1): This is a mandatory task within the Environmental Support Contractor's scope to support the Government's compliance, not an optional "Table 2" event.

• Salvage and Recycling (1.6.24.1): This requirement dictates how the Environmental Support Contractor must physically sort and dispose of waste/materials they generate during the performance of their contract duties when utilizing the DPG landfill. It does not mean the Contractor is responsible for operating DPG's recycling program.

Question 18: Services (PWS Section 3.1) The PWS states that the contractor must purchase computers and peripherals. Will DPG provide a list of approved computers and printers with the required specifications for DPG NEC?

Government Answer: Due to continually evolving conditions, the Environmental Support Contractor will have to coordinate with NEC to ascertain current government computer requirements. The government can provide an approved list of vendors/POCs on the ARMY CHESS hardware schedule. The Contracting Officer will work with schedule vendors to obtain government pricing.

Question 19: UST / TE-5 DPG UST LUST Management:

• Does DPG currently have an approved DERR plan for the Ditto Motor Pool LUST site?

o Government Answer: Yes.

• TE-5 currently states: “1 LUST Site Monitoring Event: Collection and analysis of groundwater/soil samples at the Ditto Motor Pool LUST site, typically involving 3 to 8 monitoring wells (depending on the DERR-approved plan) to track contaminant trends.”

o Government Answer: Environmental Support Contractor must comply with 5.21,b and execute work requirements in compliance with approved UST/LUST plans.

• Please confirm the current number of monitoring wells and the exact scope of work required under TE-5. (If no plan is approved yet, please advise whether it should be added under Table 2 as an option).

o Government Answer: Currently, there are 5 monitoring wells at the Ditto Motor Pool (DMP), and the approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) calls for the addition of a 6th well (the installation of which is already funded under a separate contract). Under this solicitation, the Contractor’s Firm-Fixed-Price for the Environmental Support Sustainment CLIN shall include the following baseline requirement: Groundwater monitoring of exactly 6 wells, at a quarterly event frequency (4 sampling events per year). Each sampling event includes the collection of groundwater levels at each well. Note: Any future requirements driven by the results of this CAP monitoring that exceed this stated baseline will be addressed via a separate contract modification.

Question 21: Container Management (PWS Section 5.5) The PWS addresses container management but does not explicitly cover all common container sizes and material types used at typical hazardous waste sites.

• Can Dugway provide a historical list of containers and packing materials used (e.g., by size and material type)?

o Government Answer: Yes, see TE-6 (attached)

Question 21: DPG Maps and Locations: Can Dugway provide maps with mileage references for 90-day site locations, SWMU/HWMU areas, and emission sources for Title V compliance?

Government Answer: Yes, see attached map (TE-7) and list of Title V sources (TE-8).

Question 22: Table 1 in the Instructions to Offerors (RFP page 58 of 70), specifies page limits for each Volume. Can the government please confirm that the Cover Sheet, Title Page, Tab Dividers, Table of Contents and Glossary are EXCLUDED from the page limits for each volume?

Government Answer: Confirmed. The Cover Sheet, Title Page, Tab Dividers, Table of Contents, and Glossary are excluded from the page limits for each volume.

Question 23: Can the government please confirm that Letters of Commitment for proposed Key Personnel are excluded from the 30-page limitation established for Volume II Mission Capability?

Government Answer: Confirmed. Signed Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel are excluded from the 30-page limitation for Volume II. 30-page limitation for Volume II shall be raised to 35-pages. Resumes, however, remain included in the page count unless otherwise specified.

Question 24: The Instructions to Offerors states to include a management/QC plan, but the evaluation criteria for Sub-factor 6 do not reference a QC plan. Can the government please confirm that offerors are not required to submit a QC Plan to achieve an “Acceptable” rating for this sub-factor, as it is required prior to the end of the phase-in period per PWS 6.1?

Government Answer: Correct. A full, detailed Quality Control Plan (QCP) is a post-award deliverable as defined in PWS Section 6.1 and is not required for proposal submission. For the purposes of evaluation under Sub-factor 6, offerors are only required to describe their management approach to quality control within their narrative. A separate QCP document is not required and will not be evaluated at this stage.

Question 25: Consideration given that Volume I already reaches the 15-page limit with mandatory administrative forms (SF1449, SF30s, etc.), will the government respectfully consider increasing or removing the page limitation for Volume I?

Government Answer: The Government acknowledges the administrative volume of Volume I.

The page limit for Volume I is hereby increased to 25 pages.

Question 26: Part II, Volume I, Price Proposal Instructions, Item a. states, “Price Proposal Spreadsheet: Complete the SF 1449 and Attachment 01... by entering the FFP where prompted.” Can the government please confirm that the requirement to “Complete the SF1449” is directing offerors to complete the CLIN Items on the Continuation pages (pages 2 to 7 of 70)?

Government Answer: Offerors must complete Page 1 of the SF 1449 and Page 1 of all SF 30 Amendments, in addition to completing the Price Proposal Spreadsheet (Attachment 01).

Question 27: Can the government confirm that there is no requirement to submit the completed spreadsheet as an Excel file? In other words, please confirm the tables can be submitted as part of the PDF file submitted for Volume I.

Government Answer: Confirmed. There is no requirement to submit the spreadsheet as a separate Excel file. All pricing data, including the Price Proposal Spreadsheet, shall be submitted as part of the single, searchable PDF file for Volume I.

Note: Additional questions received are currently in review by the Government.

Responses to the remaining questions and any resulting revisions to the solicitation will be provided in a forthcoming amendment.