Hill_AFB_ORC_QandA_19_Aug_2019.pdf

ID Contractor Question Government Response (GR):

1 Please provide any basewide or site-specific groundwater flow or transport modeling files in their native file formats.

Site-specific groundwater flow or transport modeling information can be found within site-specific reports provided in the GFI (Administrative Record). The native file formats themselves will be provided to the successful bidder.

2 Please provide draft versions of the project/personnel requirements as well as the evaluation criteria anticipated for this procurement so that bidders can make early decisions regarding pursuit of the contract.

Current plan is to post with the solicitation but draft may be posted sooner. Please see other ORC solicitations such as Joint Base Andrews when it is posted for an idea of the factors anticipated for other ORCs such as Hill.

3 Based on the very comprehensive initial site walk, we do not feel a second site visit is necessary and will only increase government and contractor costs and time to complete the proposal.

The Government has considered the request. However, in order to ensure maximum practicable participation a site visit during the solicitation phase will occur. Attendance at one or both site visits is not mandatory to submit a proposal.

4 What will the final acquisition strategy be (small business under the 750 employee size code or full and open)?

This information will be posted to FBO as early as practicable.

ETA end of August.

5 Will the draft evaluation criteria be released to bidders? If so, approximately when? Current plan is to post with the solicitation but draft may be posted sooner. Please see other ORC solicitations such as Joint Base Andrews when it is posted for an idea of the factors anticipated for other ORCs such as Hill.

6 Will USACE provide for a 45-day proposal period following release of the final solicitation. The Government will do its best to provide the maximum amount of time possible for the solicitation phase, schedule and other things considered. 45 days is currently anticipated.

7 Section 4.1 of the Draft PWS references a “AFCEC ORC PMP Guidance”. Can you provide this guidance?

Current plan is to post with the solicitation but draft may be posted sooner. Please see other ORC solicitations such as Joint Base Andrews when it is posted for an idea of the docs anticipated for other ORCs such as Hill.

8 Is there a preferred version of Microsoft Project and Excel for IMS preparation? Guidance will be provided in IMS and MPS Guidance;

however, it should be provided in both MS Project and Excel.

9 Section 4.2 of the draft PWS references “…IMS and MPS Guidance”. Can you provide this guidance?

Current plan is to post with the solicitation but draft may be posted sooner.

10 Section 4.5 of the Draft PWS references “AFCEC CPSMR Template”. Can you provide this template?

Current plan is to post with the solicitation but draft may be posted sooner.

11 Where will the internal kickoff meeting referenced in Section 4.6.1 of the Draft PWS be held?

Where will the regulator kick off meeting referenced in the same section be held?

Kickoff meeting will be held at Hill AFB. Regulator kick off meeting location has not yet been determined.

12 Section 4.6.2 of the PWS indicates “residential door-to-door notifications” in support of public meetings and hearings. As door-to-door notifications are labor intensive and time consuming, please provide clarification on the frequency, description of, and number of door to door notifications that would be required under the ORC.

Section 4.6.2 of the PWS will be clarified. Additional requirements are necessary for OU 15, which can be ascertained from the documents in the GFI (Administrative Record).

13 Section 4.6.2 of the draft PWS indicates the contractor will provide responses for FOIA requests within 2 hours of request. Please confirm if 2 hours or 2 days was intended. Please provide anticipated number of FOIA requests and type of information that would require assembly and submittal within the intended timeframe.

The PWS was updated. A minimum of one (1) day for responses will be given, unless a longer timeframe is stipulated.

14 Section 4.13.1 indicates that the contractor shall register AF owned monitoring wells and infrastructure located off-Base with the Blue Stakes Utility Locations service and respond to approximately 300 emails and 50 site visits per year. Will the AF have additional optional sub- CLINs if the estimated quantity of emails/responses exceed this estimate? Can the AF provide the list of wells and infrastructure and locations (coordinates)?

No. The intent of providing an estimate was to give the bidder an idea of the magnitude associated with the scope based on historical level of effort. Additional sub-CLINs will not be provided.

For a list of wells, infrastructure and locations, see reports for the various OUs titled "annual monitoring report" provided in the GFI (Administrative Record).

15 Is PFOA/PFAS sampling or data evaluation (Section 5.5 of draft PWS) required under this solicitation?

PFOS/PFOA sampling is currently not required. If a standard is promulgated, a contract modification may be completed to address the promulgated requirements.

16 Who will perform technical review of documents? Will USACE perform technical review of documents (or only surveillance)?

AF and USACE will both be performing technical review of documents.

17 Section 8.1.1 (Scope Discussion and Limits) indicates contractor is responsible for well abandonments. How many wells in total will require abandonment under the ORC? Can a table of the well depth, diameter and surface completion for those wells slated for abandonment be provided? The sub-CLIN structure indicates installation and abandonment of 5 “shallow”, “medium” and “deep” wells. Are these in addition to the wells listed under subCLIN 0021AA?

Most of the wells installed to monitor the deep on-Base TCE plume at OU 10 are no longer sampled and are in the Falcon Hill development area. Will the scope of work for the ORC include the abandonment of those wells?

CLIN 0007 includes optional sub-clins for well maintenance, repairs and abandonments - CLIN is not associated with any one particular site. These are separate from Sub-CLIN 0021AA. 0021AA is to abandon monitoring points/wells specifically associated with site SS017.

18 Section 8.1.1 (Scope Discussion and Limits) indicates that the ORC contractor is responsible for “Executing Step 1 (determination of release) of the “Interim Air Force Guidance on Sampling and Response Actions for 1,4-Dioxane at Operational and BRAC Installations, 15 August 2013” for 5 sites. Under what sub-CLIN(s) will this work be performed?

This work will be performed in accordance with regular monitoring activities at the site. A separate Sub-CLIN will not be created. The sites identified in the PWS requiring 1,4- Dioxane sampling include: SD107 (OU 12), SS017 (OU 5), SS089 (OU 9), SS090 (OU9), and SS091 (OU 5).

19 The draft PWS indicates the Contractor shall be responsible for implementing findings/recommendations/deficiencies in a FYR identified in the GFI for any site in Table 1.

Please confirm - will the contractor be responsible for implementing these only for the FYR included in the AR/GFI (2018 FYR), or for the other 2 FYRs to be conducted during the POP for the ORC? If responsible for implementing tasks for the 2023 and 2028 FYRs, please provide level of effort considerations for scoping such tasks.

Contractor will be responsible for implementing FYR findings/recommendations/deficiencies for the 2018 FYR and the 2023 and 2028 FYR. An evaluation of the 4 previous FYRs conducted, all of which have been provided as GFI (Administrative Record), will provide an idea of the level of effort required for scoping out year tasks.

20 What type of monitoring well surface completions are in place at Hill AFB? Both aboveground completions with bollards and flush mount completions are in place at Hill AFB.

21 What are the minimum reporting requirements (type, frequency; information/analyses) for LTM and O&M activities?

Refer to each OU specific Performance Standard Verification Plan and Annual RA-O monitoring Reports available on the Hill AFB Admin Record for minimum reporting requirements.

22 Who is responsible for maintenance of Hill AFB facilities? The ORC contractor is responsible for maintaining facilities associated with the Hill AFB ERA Program. Refer to government furnished property list for details.

23 What snow removal is required? The ORC Contractor is responsible for snow removal near facilities to maintain site safety.

24 What grounds maintenance is required? The ORC contractor is required to conduct ground maintenance activities at off-base locations and general maintenance and upkeep around monitoring points (weed/grass removal) etc. to comply with Base security and fire prevention requirements.

25 Are there any special requirements to gain access to the Base after normal working hours, on weekends, and on holidays for system alarm response?

Contractor access badges will include the hours for base access.

Twenty four hour access can be granted.

26 Does any communication with a third party or the public need to be documented? All communication with a third party or the public needs to be documented.

27 Are site and system signs provided by the Hill AFB? The ORC contractor is responsible for making and installing signs.

28 Some remedial systems seem to be older. Are PLC/SCADA software systems and hardware still supported by developers/manufacturers or are they obsolete?

Refer to the site specific Operation and Maintenance Manuals on the Hill AFB Admin Record for details on the operation of the PLC/SCADA systems.

29 Are road closure permits required to access locations within or along roads in off-Base areas? A traffic control plan following city and state guidelines will be required when working off-base.

30 During the site visit, some cracks were observed in the SMS pad. Will Hill AFB be replacing the SMS Pad asphalt or will this be a requirement of the contractor?

The cracks in the asphalt will be sealed by the end of the current contract POP.

31 During the site visit, some cracks were observed in the asphalt over the Berman Pond. Will Hill AFB be replacing the Berman Pond asphalt layer or will this be a requirement of the contractor?

The cracks in the asphalt will be sealed by the end of the current contract POP.

32 Will milestone payment be made if regulators are delinquent with their review or review is delayed excessively?

Per Section 4.3 - "For milestones where regulatory acceptance/concurrence is required and regulatory acceptance/concurrence cannot be obtained, the AF and USACE will evaluate the Contractor’s documents to determine if they are legally and technically acceptable to warrant payment for achieving that milestone."

33 Will contractor be responsible for damage by others (e.g., on or off base construction) to wells, facilities, or system infrastructure?

CLIN 0007 addresses well repair, maintenance, and abandonment.

34 Enclosure 1 of the draft PWS states that LCCs are to be calculated over 30 years or until SC, whichever is sooner. In order to ensure that LCC estimates from each bidder are evaluated consistently, please specify if the LCCs are to be calculated as present worth values and if so, what discount rate should be applied.

LCC cost estimates will not be evaluated as part of the proposal. The winning Contractor is expected to deliver a Reduce LCC Plan in accordance with Section 1.2.3 of the

PWS.

35 If bidders identify activities that will reduce LCCs but are not specifically included in the CLIN-subCLIN structure, can the proposed sub-CLIN structure be modified to include these activities as new subCLINs? Related to draft PWS Table 1 and the CLIN-SubCLIN Structure:

The contractor is responsible for proposing activities to reach the Performance Objectives and Milestones noted in the Sub- CLIN Structure. The Sub-CLIN structure will not change;

however, the contractor should build the IMS/MPS with proposed activities/milestones necessary to achieve the performance objectives, and should include these activities that will reduce the LCCs.

36 Based on the draft PWS Table 1, it appears that updates to the CSM is required for 2 sites (OT026 and WP007) as part of the alternative objective. Section 1.2.2.1.2 states that the revised CSM would include “establishing or updating existing fate and transport models.” The definition of CSM in Enclosure 1 does not mention fate and transport models. Should the ORC contractor assume a numerical or qualitative fate and transport model for these revised CSMs? If numerical, what characteristics or level of effort should be assumed for the fate and transport model? Are there existing F&T models for these sites and can these models be forwarded as GFI?

There are descriptions of fate and transport models associated with each of the two sites are included in the respective Feasibility Study Reports. The fate and transport model should provide sufficient decision support information for remedy implementation, remedy modification, and monitoring program decisions.

37 Based on the draft PWS Table 1, it appears that updates to the groundwater monitoring program are required for one site (WP007) as part of the alternative objective. Per section 1.2.2.1.3, please provide the current horizontal and vertical well distribution information as GFI.

The Hill AFB Admin Record contains numerous reports for WP007 which can be reviewed for well distribution information.

38 Based on the draft PWS Table 1, it appears that SSIs are required for OU 6, OU 8, and OU 2.

Please confirm.

Confirmed. The Sub-CLIN structure identifies SSIs as optional tasks.

39 With regard to DB001, during the site visit, the AF representative indicated that an asbestos removal action will occur under a separate contract and that under the ORC only land use controls will need to be maintained and an annual site visit conducted to address any visible asbestos.

Table 1 indicates a performance objective of RC (subCLIN structure includes FS, PP, ROD). Will Table 1 and sub-CLIN structure be updated to reflect the requirements indicated during the site visit? What will the performance objective be for DB001?

Table 1 and the sub-CLIN are correct for DB001. No changes required.

40 With regard to SS017, Table 1 indicates “Abandon Monitoring Points Associated with Lease USAF-AFMC-KRSM-15-1-0475”. Will this lease and the locations, depth, diameter, and other well construction/completion information be provided as GFI?

Yes.

41 The draft sub-CLIN structure for ZZ113 indicates “conduct RA-O” however, there is no ROD or remedial action work plan in the Administrative Record. Please provide ROD and remedial action work plan (or draft if not yet finalized).

The Draft ROD has been provided on CD as additional GFI.

The Performance Objective in Table 1 of the PWS was revised to conduct "IRA-O in accordance with the Final OU 15-ZZ113 Indoor Air Program Basewide Air Sampling and Analysis Plan, Revision 4 (May 2016) and the Final OU 15-ZZ113 Letter Work Plan for the 2016-2017 Indoor Air Sampling Event (30 Jan 2017)."

42 For LF001 (OU 1) ROD Amendment, under what performance objective or SubCLIN is “the cis- 1,2-DCE and chlorobenzene evaluation” to be performed under and what is purpose and intended nature of this evaluation?

The evaluation will be performed under the Sub-CLINs 0013CA-CK (regular compliance monitoring). The purpose of the evaluation is to address the 2018 FYR Issue. Revised the Performance Objective that a ROD amendment, if necessary, would be based on compliance monitoring results.

43 For LF012 (OU 4) ROD Amendment, there is no performance objective/SubCLIN to implement remedy changes for Landfill 2 anticipated to be documented in the ROD Amendment. Will these remedy changes be implemented under a modification or should we propose a Landfill 2 remedy?

Table 1 of the PWS was revised. LTM activities described in Table 1 should begin upon completion of ROD Amendment.

Updated the Period of Performance to begin upon completion of ROD Amendment through the duration of the POP.

44 For OT026 (OU 6) ROD Amendment, there is no performance objective/SubCLIN to implement remedy changes per the alternate objective of remedy evaluation and DD. Will these remedy changes be implemented under a modification or should we propose a remedy?

Correct, there is no Performance Objective/Sub-CLIN to implement the remedy changes for Alternate Objectives.

Remedy changes would be implemented under a modification if the AF decides to implement. Please note that Alternative Objectives are optional - the AF will decide whether to award sub-CLINs.

45 For OT033 (OU 8), under what performance objective/SubCLIN will the recommendations from the Alternate Objectives performance objective be implemented? Will these remedy changes be implemented under a modification or should we propose remedy changes?

There is no Performance Objective/Sub-CLIN to implement the remedy changes for Alternate Objectives. Remedy changes would be implemented under a modification if the AF decides to implement. Please note that Alternative Objectives are optional - the AF reserves right to decide whether to award sub- CLINs.

46 For OT106, the performance objective is ROD. The sub-CLIN structure includes optional sub- CLINs for removal and disposal of contaminate soil that is not reflected in Table 1. Will table 1 be revised to include this alternate objective?

No. Soil removal is an optional sub-CLIN. The AF reserves right to decide whether to award sub-CLINs. Soil removal should be included in bidder proposal for AF evaluation.

47 For SD107 (OU 12) ROD Amendment, there is no performance objective or SubCLIN to implement remedy changes documented in the ROD Amendment. Will these remedy changes be implemented under a modification?

Correct. Remedy changes would be implemented under a modification.

48 The sub-CLIN structure for ST061 includes year 9 and year 10 compliance after SC. Will these be optional sub-CLINs (compliance would not be required following SC).

The performance period for SC is through year 10 (final year of the contract). The Contractor will have until the end of the contract PoP to achieve SC. The AF projects to fund SC activities in year 8. The expectation is it will take 2 years to prepare site closure documentation and achieve regulatory approval for SC. During that time, compliance with regulatory requirements will still be required; therefore, compliance Sub- CLINs were included for years 9 and 10. If SC is achieved sooner, the remaining Sub-CLINs would still be paid to the contractor upon achievement of SC.

49 The CLIN-SubCLIN Structure includes several SubCLINs that do not appear to tie to performance objectives in Table 1 including: 0021AB Achieve Explanation of Significant Differences to Remove Aeration Curtain, 0021AC Achieve Focused Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study in the area of the building demolition, 0021AD Achieve Soil Excavation and Disposal in the area of the building demolition, and 0021AE Achieve Explanation of Significant Differences. Under what performance objective/SubCLIN is the removal of the Aeration Curtain to be implemented? Since data on contaminant nature and extent will not be available until the Focused Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study in the area of the building demolition (0021AC) is completed, what scoping assumptions should we make to cost SubCLIN 0021AD, Achieve Soil Excavation and Disposal in the area of the building demolition? Does this soil include the arsenic contaminated soil documented in the original OU5 ROD or deeper soil contaminated by VOCs?

Revised the Sub-CLIN structure to include Sub-CLIN for removal of the Aeration Curtain item (0021AC).

Revised Sub-CLIN structure. Excavation and Focused Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Sub-CLINs were removed. A Supplemental Site Investigation for Buildings 1701, 1704, and/or 1710 is now included. If excavations are indeed required, they will be managed via modification.

50 For WP007 (OU 2), the CLIN-SubCLIN Structure included SubCLIN 0032AE Complete Pilot Study(ies)/Treatability Test(s) but there is no performance objective included in Table 1. Will these potential pilot/treatability studies be implemented under a modification? If not, what scoping assumptions should we make to cost these potential pilot/treatability studies which would be recommended under preceding SubCLIN 0032AD Achieve Remedy Evaluation and Recommendations Report?

Refer to Section 1.2.2.2 Remedy Evaluation and Recommendations. Pilot Studies/Treatability Tests are optional sub-CLINs as part of the Alternate Objective described in Table 1. If Pilot Studies/Treatability Tests are required and the AF decides to award the optional Sub-CLIN, they would be implemented under the ORC. Based on review of the numerous WP007 documents available in the Hill AFB Admin Record, the contractor should propose potential

51 For Site SD107 (OU 12), please specify if the ORC contractor would be responsible for the costs of characterizing and disposing of ACM in the event of future construction in the source area, or if these costs would be addressed by a modification.

Characterizing and disposal of ACM material in the SD107 source area in the event of future construction is not part of the ORC contract.

52 For Site SS089 (OU 9), the TCE concentrations were characterized during the site walk as “hovering just above the MCL” and the objective is SC. A review of available documents indicates that the TCE concentrations are higher than suggested during the site walk, and there has been difficulty in injecting substrate in portions of this site. Would AFCEC consider an alternate objective for the site that would not include SC but would result in lower LCCs?

The objective remains at SC.

53 For Site OT033 (OU 8), an SI has been specified in Table 1 of the draft PWS. The “Operable Unit Summary Sheet” stated that the “On-Base ‘Deep’ TCE plume has not been completely defined.”

However, additional characterization of the on-Base plume was not mentioned during the site walk. Please clarify if the SSI for OU 8 will address the on-Base area, the off-Base area, or both, and the approximate depth of the groundwater being investigated.

The Alternate Objectives Sub-CLIN addresses both on and off-base portions of the plume. The Hill AFB Admin Record contains many OU8 reports that discuss depth to groundwater.