Hill_AFB_PWS_V9_20191016.pdf

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

FOR

OPTIMIZED REMEDIATION CONTRACT (ORC)

AT

HILL AIR FORCE BASE (AFB), UT

SOLICITATION NUMBER: W9123819R0050

16 October 2019

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

1.0 SCOPE

This requirement is for environmental remediation activities at Hill AFB (HAFB). This Performance Work Statement (PWS) defines the scope of environmental services necessary to conduct site restoration. The range of activities includes maintenance of established remedies, implementation of optimization to enhance remedial progress at applicable sites, and achievement of site-specific objectives. The Contractor shall undertake Environmental Remediation activities to achieve Performance Objectives (POs) at 23 Installation Restoration Program (IRP) sites and three (3) Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP) sites.

NOTE: For purposes of this ORC, the term “Government” includes the Air Force (AF) and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). While regulators are a governmental entity, they are also a third party over whom the AF has no control and, as such, will be referred to as “regulators”.

1.1 Introduction

HAFB is located in northern Utah, approximately 25 miles north of Salt Lake City and about five miles south of Ogden. The Installation occupies approximately 6,700 acres in Davis and Weber counties. The Installation is bounded on the west by Interstate 15 and the Davis-Weber Canal; and on the east by private property. HAFB and earlier military installations that occupied the Installation operated industrial facilities related to military aircraft since the construction of the Ogden Air Depot in 1940. Many different aircraft, missile, and weapons systems have been maintained and tested in the course of continuous operation and expansion of the Installation since its inception. Industrial activities at HAFB have created a number of hazardous waste sites. Contamination from chemicals has impacted the groundwater and formed large plumes, both on and off Installation.

HAFB is also responsible for two off-base properties – Little Mountain Test Facility (LMTF) and the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR). LMTF is a 740-acre annex located 12 miles northwest of HAFB. It has been used from the 1950’s through the present for missile component testing. The UTTR is not included in this contract.

Remediation activities at HAFB are being conducted pursuant to Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), and National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP) requirements. Regulatory oversight is provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and Utah Department of Environmental Quality

(UDEQ).

HAFB was placed on the National Priorities List (NPL) in 1987. The IRP and MMRP sites at the installation are being administered under a Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) signed by USEPA and UDEQ in 1991.

Environmental remediation activities at LMTF are being conducted pursuant to the CERCLA in accordance with an Integration Agreement (IA) with regulatory oversight provided by UDEQ.

The LMTF is not on the NPL.

1.2 Overview of ORC Scope and Requirements

The Contractor shall perform all the necessary environmental remediation activities required to achieve the POs of this PWS. This PWS and enclosures listed below include requirements of the project to meet the AF objectives:

• Enclosure 1 – Acronyms and Definitions

• Enclosure 2 – Government Furnished Information (GFI) o Enclosure 2A – Administrative Record Spreadsheet o Enclosure 2B – GFI CD o Enclosure 2C – Alternate Objective Site Consideration Summaries

• Enclosure 3 – Government Furnished Property (GFP)

• Enclosure 4 – Operations Security (OPSEC) Addendum

The AF is required to implement remedies as necessary to enable the mission, protect human health and the environment and comply with laws and regulations. The goal of the ORC initiative is to ensure the AF continues to fulfill all facets of its Environmental Restoration Program (ERP) mission, while effectively and efficiently managing the program in a performance-based, results-oriented and cost conscious framework. The AF desires all sites be cleaned up to standards that allow for the current or reasonably anticipated future land use of the property. The intent of the ORC initiative is to advance site cleanup during the Period of Performance (POP) in the most efficient and cost-effective manner as supported by a business case analysis that achieves the greatest reduction in life-cycle cost (LCC). The AF is interested in substantial reduction of long-term environmental liabilities and total LCCs. Hand in hand, accurate documentation and reporting of contaminant removal and cost savings are critical adjuncts to optimization success. In keeping with Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-7020, the AF defines optimization, under the ORC, as the reduction of contaminant mass and concentrations, reduction in LCC, or any combination of activities leading to acceleration of Response Complete (RC)/Site Closeout (SC), as a result of remedial implementation the Contractor undertakes, above and beyond what is required to maintain compliance in accordance with an approved Decision Document (DD).

The Contractor shall function as an integral team member in support of the Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC) mission to include the sharing of information with USACE, other AFCEC Contractors and AF personnel; and cooperation with community stakeholders, regulators, and other Government entities in accordance with the Community Involvement Plan.

Requirements for efficient management of this contract include, but are not limited to, the achievement of the POs in the Performance Period (PP) per Table 1 of this PWS, and timely identification and solution of impediments to successful project execution. The Contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, supplies, tools, materials and other items necessary to perform the tasks defined in this PWS. The Contractor is solely responsible for reviewing all available information and forming their independent, professional conclusions/interpretations of site conditions and requirements to achieve the POs of this contract within PP specified for each site.

AFCEC will rely on the Contractor’s expertise in recognizing and addressing problematic issues during the execution of this contract. The Contractor shall perform all work in accordance with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. The Contractor shall also comply with

Installation regulations. Remedies shall conform to environmental permits, DD requirements, or other legal requirements. The Contractor shall continue work throughout the entire duration of the POP.

Site-specific POs are identified in Table 1: Performance Table below. POs that are in keeping with standard DERP milestones are defined in Enclosure 1. In addition, for certain categories of sites, the AF has set data-driven POs based on current site conditions in keeping with the POP of the contract and ORC goal. These POs for this contract are Alternate Objectives and Reduce LCC; these terms are described below.

The PP specified in Table 1 starts from the Obligation Date of the first Sub-Contract Line Item Number (Sub-CLIN) for the site unless otherwise specified. All approvals (both Government and regulator) per the Performance Standard are required in writing.

1.2.1 Performance Models

The Contractor shall develop performance models for all sites listed in Table 1 of this PWS that do not have a PO of Long Term Management (LTM) and have a remedy planned and/or in place.

For all sites proposed to reach RC or SC during the POP, work planning documents shall contain the performance model. Performance models shall describe how site conditions are expected to change over time, using appropriate performance indicators, from current state through PO achievement. The Contractor shall provide monitoring reports, in accordance with the DD, that demonstrate whether the remedial response is progressing and performing consistent with the performance model.

Performance model and site management approach shall include the following:

• Develop and document the approach to determine remedial progress relative to the defined performance indicators, associated decision criteria, and objectives consistent with the performance model. The documented approach is expected to facilitate decisions about optimization as well as provide a quantifiable understanding of how the response is progressing, list contingency options, and demonstrate when the objective has been reached. An individual site may have more than one performance model (e.g., different parts of the site that are addressed by separate remedies and represented by different sets of monitoring wells).

• Demonstrate an understanding of the site-specific Conceptual Site Model (CSM) as it relates to the operation of existing systems, distribution of contaminates, and remedy effectiveness and degradation rates (see details on the definition of CSM in Section 8.1.3). Update the CSM using Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) as needed based on performance and monitoring data throughout the performance period and implement remedy contingencies as warranted by the evolving CSM. Submit updated CSMs subsequent to receipt of new information.

• Develop an Exit Strategy that identifies and implements opportunities to improve remedy protectiveness, effectiveness, and cost efficiency, and to facilitate progress toward the end goal of the Exit Strategy, including innovative technologies (see details on the Exit Strategy preparation in Section 8.1.4). The goal is to accelerate contaminant reduction thereby minimizing future AF liability and cost to the greatest degree feasible. Update the Exit Strategy as dictated by site progress throughout the PP. Submit updated Exit Strategies subsequent to receipt of new information.

• Develop baselines and performance models representative of the extent of contamination being addressed that describe the historic and expected course of the remedial progress (i.e., how conditions are expected to change over time as demonstrated by appropriate performance indicators) from the current baseline state through PO achievement.

• Define the baseline state for each contaminant of concern (COC). The baseline state is determined by using select monitoring wells that are representative of the site and with sufficient data to develop statistics-based historic concentration trends for site COCs. A scientific approach that uses a line of best-fit (e.g., first order decay rate) is appropriate for estimating the baseline attenuation rate, The baseline attenuation rate, in turn, can be used to extrapolate a baseline concentration and measures of future performance.

Supporting information for the baseline concentrations shall include the rationale for the well selection and the time period used to develop the trends, justification for the selected line of best-fit, actual values used to define the trend, and extension of the line of best-fit to predict values for future years independent of future remedy implementation plans.

For additional detail on development of baselines, refer to “Site-Specific Baseline Development Guidance” version 1, dated July 2019.

• Using the baseline as a starting point (above), develop a scientifically-based remedial performance model for each COC. The performance model shall be representative of the contaminant extent being addressed and include performance indicators, decision criteria, and annual and final goals achievable within the performance period. Goals should be consistent with the performance model used to optimize remedial efficiency, quantify how the response is progressing, and demonstrate when the annual and final goals have been achieved. The performance model shall include demonstration of contaminant reduction, process improvement and corrective action level indicators, and process failure and contingency action level indicators that reconcile underperforming remedies when combined with the decision criteria.

1.2.2 Optimized Exit Strategy

Not Applicable.

1.2.3 Alternate Objectives

Table 1 of the PWS identifies Alternate Objectives as the PO for selected sites. These sites have complex attributes that have, to date, inhibited progress towards the achievement of RC. For Alternate Objective sites, as for all sites in Table 1 of the PWS where applicable, the Contractor shall maintain compliance throughout the POP of the contract with all existing regulatory requirements including but not limited to regulations, Federal Facility Agreements, RCRA Permits, final or interim Record of Decisions (RODs), or other equivalent remedial DDs. The Contractor is responsible for implementing changes to the monitoring program based on activities conducted in the Advanced Site Characterization (PWS Section 1.2.3.1) including the addition and decommissioning of wells in the monitoring well network as agreed by the all parties and the addition of new delineation monitoring where new information indicates our understanding of the plumes is changed..

Based on technical review of existing site conditions/activities, the AF placed sites in the category of Alternate Objective if one or more of the following conditions exist:

a) Achieving RC is expected to require substantially longer than 30 years

b) Achieving RC is unattainable with standard characterization and/or existing remediation technology due to technical or other limitations related to site conditions

c) Achieving RC is anticipated to require advanced site characterization technologies to improve the Conceptual Site Model (CSM), determine appropriate remedial technology, and/or characterize recently regulated contaminants

The AF will use data and information obtained during execution of this PWS to determine restoration potential and future investment strategies at Alternate Objective sites. Each Optional Sub-CLIN for the Alternate Objective sites will only be awarded if the activities are needed to determine the future investment strategy for the site. The decision to award each Optional Sub- CLIN resides solely at the discretion of the AF.

For each Alternate Objective site, a summary of site-specific considerations is provided as GFI.

As with all GFI provided, this GFI is provided for informational purposes only; the Contractor remains responsible for developing their own independent, professional conclusions/interpretation of site conditions and requirements to achieve the PO. The Contractor shall conduct project scoping sessions before work plan development and throughout the planning and execution of the project to meet the PO including the Installation Point(s) of Contact (POC[s]), the AFCEC Program Manager, the AF technical support team, and USACE Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). Upon approval by the Government team, the Contractor shall participate in scoping sessions with the regulators, as appropriate.

1.2.3.1 Advanced Site Characterization

Based on existing data, the AF has determined that the existing remedial approaches at the Alternative Objective sites are not achieving satisfactory remedial progress towards their intended goals. In order for the AF to determine the best path forward for these sites, the Contractor shall conduct Advanced Site Characterization to collect data to update and refine the CSM in order to achieve the following goals: (1) Fill data gaps; and (2) Collect data needed to:

(A) Determine why existing and previous remedial actions are not effective at achieving remedial progress; (B) Determine appropriate remedial technology(ies) based on site conditions;

C) Develop remediation design parameters for recommended technology(ies); and D) Characterize recently regulated contaminants, if required.

Advanced Site Characterization includes the following three activities: (1) Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI), (2) Revised CSM, and (3) Groundwater Monitoring Program Update.

1.2.3.1.1 Supplemental Site Investigation

The Contractor shall conduct an Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI) to collect data necessary to improve the CSM, determine appropriate remedial technology, support remediation design and construction, and/or characterize recently regulated contaminants. The Contractor shall implement advanced characterization methods, both established approaches and state-of-science techniques consistent with AF, regulatory, Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC), and Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program/Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (SERDP/ESTCP) guidance to attain these objectives.

Data collection includes better definition of the geology, hydrogeology, geochemistry, and/or distribution of Contaminants of Concern (COCs), as required. The Contractor shall evaluate the need for, and collect the following data where appropriate in support of: (1) Source Zone Delineation; (2) Source Strength1,2,3; (3) Vertical and lateral extent of contamination, if not sufficiently defined; (4) Plume Stability4; (5) Migration pathway, rates, and fluxes in 3-D; (6) Mass distribution; (7) Biogeochemical framework; (8) Impact of recent and historical remedies on site conditions; and (9) Comprehensive Risk including updating the baseline risk assessment, if needed, and the vapor intrusion pathway.

The SSI report shall document data collection efforts to include a risk evaluation, if appropriate.

The Contractor shall evaluate and provide recommendations regarding whether additional source control is needed or whether the plume, or portions of the plume, are amenable to natural attenuation by conducting source strength and plume stability evaluations as needed.

1.2.3.1.2 Conceptual Site Model

The Contractor shall develop a revised CSM in 3-D to include establishing or updating existing fate and transport models based on existing data and data gathered during the SSI. The CSM should cover the source area and the distal plume, to include the lateral and vertical extent of the contaminants in the context of geologic/hydrogeological parameters and the remedial actions conducted to date.

1.2.3.1.3 Groundwater Monitoring Program Update

The Contractor shall evaluate the current horizontal and vertical well distribution to determine if the following can be properly evaluated:

Remedy performance in treatment areas Hydrogeology, plume geometry, horizontal and vertical plume stability, and matrix diffusion across site Plume migration through use of perimeter/boundary wells and sentinel wells

1 ITRC. (2015). Integrated DNAPL Site Characterization and Tool Selection.

2 SERDP/ESTCP. (2012). Matrix Diffusion Tool Kit.

3 USEPA. (2009). Evaluating Natural Source Zone Depletion at Sites with LNAPL.

4 USEPA. (2014). High Resolution Site Characterization for Groundwater Short Course, 23rd Annual NARPM Training Program.

Based on the well network evaluation, and coordinated and approved by the Government and regulators (if required), the Contractor shall optimize the monitoring well network to include adjusting sample collection frequency and the addition of new wells as appropriate. The Contractor shall update the Basewide or Site-specific Monitoring Plan or other equivalent document, as appropriate.

1.2.3.2 Remedy Evaluation and Recommendation

Based on all existing data and data gathered during the Advanced Site Characterization, the Contractor shall evaluate the existing active and/or passive remedy(ies)5,6,7. The Contractor shall provide recommendations to augment, modify, and/or replace the existing remedy8. The evaluation and recommendations will include a cost-benefit analyses and evaluation of the usability, expandability, and/or discontinued use of any existing infrastructure. All remedy recommendations must include design performance model addressing all COCs and breakdown products. Refer to Section 1.2.1, Performance Models.

Where necessary to evaluate the proposed technology, the Contractor shall conduct pilot scale technology demonstrations. The Contractor shall identify appropriate remedial technologies and target zones, design/plan, conduct, and evaluate the pilot and/or field scale technology consistent with AF, regulatory, and ITRC guidance. The Contractor shall determine performance monitoring criteria and identify a control sub-site (current state) for comparison and to evaluate results.

In some instances, achievement of RC may not be feasible with currently available technologies within a reasonable timeframe. If this is the case, Contractor shall develop and evaluate alternatives for site management that will be protective of human and ecological health. If this recommendation is made, it must include the rationale, recommended metric when active remediation can cease, and a strategy for obtaining regulatory buy-in.

1.2.3.3 Decision Document Amendment

Based on the results of the remedy evaluation and recommendation, it may be necessary to amend the DD to augment, modify, and/or replace the existing remedy. If warranted, the Contractor shall update the DD.

1.2.4 Remedial Action – Operation and Reduce Life-Cycle Cost and Long Term

Management and Reduce Life-Cycle Cost

Table 1 of the PWS identifies Remedial Action – Operation (RA-O) and Reduce LCC or LTM and Reduce LCC as the PO for selected sites in accordance with the optimization initiative. The goal of these POs is to minimize future AF liability and cost to the greatest degree feasible utilizing remedial optimization techniques. Reduce LCC sites have achieved Remedy in Place (RIP) or RC, have remedies that are effective (source control, risk mitigation, and plume

5 USEPA. (2010). Best Management Practices.

6 USEPA. (2014). Groundwater Remedy Completion Strategy.

7 ITRC. (2006). Performance-Based Management.

8 ITRC. (2010). Use and Measurement of Mass Flux and Mass Discharge.

stability) and have the potential for LCC reduction through a variety of optimization actions, for example:

• Reducing sampling frequency

• Reducing system operations

• Reducing number of wells sampled per event

• Reducing number of analytes per sampling event The Contractor shall achieve the following objectives for each Reduce LCC site:

• Maintain compliance with all DDs and Permits (currently in place or to be approved) throughout the POP.

• For RA-O sites, develop performance models addressing all COCs and breakdown products. Refer to section 1.2.1, Performance Models.

• Deliver a Reduce LCC Plan, as a stand-alone plan or in the PMP, that identifies opportunities to improve cost efficiency of RA-O or LTM activities, and the planned approach for implementation. The Reduce LCC Plan shall:

o Provide a basis for proposed reductions in LCC throughout the POP compared to the cost of status-quo activities (those required to maintain compliance). The planned reduction can be illustrated using a line graph (current, planned, achieved) or verbiage describing the current and planned reductions.

o Document risk and mitigation strategies for implementing optimization activities to reduce LCC.

• Update or revise site-specific work plans, monitoring plans, and/or DDs, as appropriate.

• Deliver Reduce LCC Reports to document progress in achieving the planned reductions when those reductions are achieved. Reduce LCC Reports may be combined with monitoring reports. Reductions in required activities are contingent upon regulatory approval.

• Deliver a Reduce LCC Summary and Forecasting Report two years prior to the POP end date. The Reduce LCC Summary and Forecasting Report shall:

o Document optimization activities to date, and forecast remaining activities and assumptions to further reduce LCC 10 years post-POP.

o Provide a realistic schedule to achieve SC or RC after the POP (the Contractor shall identify which PO is the optimal endpoint).

1.2.5 Remedial Action – Operation and Long Term Management

Table 1 of the PWS identifies RA-O and LTM as the PO for selected sites. The Contractor shall achieve the following objectives for each RA-O and LTM site:

• Maintain compliance with all DDs and permits (currently in place or to be approved) throughout the POP.

• Update or revise site-specific work plans, monitoring plans, and/or DDs, as appropriate.

• For RA-O sites, develop performance models addressing all COCs and breakdown products. Refer to section 1.2.1, Performance Models.

• For RA-O sites, deliver an RA-O & Reduce LCC Summary and Forecasting Report two years prior to the POP end date. The Reduce LCC Summary and Forecasting Report shall:

o Document activities to date and identify activities and assumptions to further reduce LCC 10 years post-PO.

Table 1: Performance Table

Site Performance Objective Performance Period for

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

Non Site- Specific Task

Project Management Plan (PMP):

1) Draft PMP

2) Final PMP

3) Updates as necessary

Draft PMP within 60 calendar days from contract award, Final PMP within 14 calendar days of receipt of AF and USACE comments on the draft, and update as necessary throughout the

POP

AF and USACE approval of PMP.

The PMP should be maintained with accuracy and completeness based on the current technical approach for each site, management structure, etc.

Non Site- Specific Task

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Draft QASP within 60 calendar days from contract award and updates as necessary throughout the

POP

AF and USACE approval of QASP.

Non Site- Specific Task

Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)/Milestone Payment Schedule (MPS)

Draft IMS/MPS within 60 calendar days from contract award, Final IMS/MPS within 14 calendar days of receipt of AF and USACE comments on the draft, and updates monthly throughout the

POP

AF and USACE approval of

IMS/MPS.

Period for

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

Non Site- Specific Task

Basewide Quality Program Plan (QPP) Draft Basewide QPP within 60 calendar days from contract award and update as necessary throughout the

POP

AF and USACE and regulatory approval of Basewide QPP.

Non Site- Specific Task

Operate Soil Management System (SMS) and/or the Heavy Equipment Decontamination Pad (HEDP)

Through the duration of the

POP

Operate the SMS in compliance with the SMS Operation and Maintenance Manual and without any Notices of Violation (NOVs). Operate the HEDP in compliance with the HEDP Operation Manual.

Hill AFB, UT

BP504

(Operable Unit [OU] 14)

LTM in accordance with the approved DDs Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Assessment Report for Land Use Controls).

BP504A

(OU 14)

LTM in accordance with the approved DDs Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Assessment Report for Land Use Controls).

BP504B

(OU 14)

LTM in accordance with the approved DDs Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Assessment Report for Land Use Controls).

DB001 Response Complete

Upon achievement of RC, continue LTM in accordance with the approved DDs throughout the duration of the

POP

Five (5) years AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RC (i.e., AF signature on Final Remedial Action Completion Report).

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Assessment Report for Land Use Controls).

LF001

(OU 1)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs and any DD changes

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly Operations and Maintenance [O&M] Reports, etc.).

LF001

(OU 1)

ROD Amendment, if necessary, based on compliance monitoring results

Two (2) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0014AA

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ROD Amendment).

LF011

(OU 4)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

LF011

(OU 4)

Decommission OU4 Phytostabilization Study Site including removal of wire woven mesh fence from around two (2) plots of trees, weather station, and data acquisition system

One (1) year from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0015AA

AF and USACE approval of a letter report describing removal efforts and final disposition of equipment.

LF011

(OU 4)

Evaluate effectiveness, efficacy, and adequacy of the existing remedy(ies) across site to include the landfill cap, five enhanced reductive dechlorination (ERD) biobarriers, ERD bioreactor and horizontal drain upgradient system (HUDS), per the current ROD and Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) Work Plan to target the plume (in accordance with USEPA, 20109;

USEPA, 201410; and ITRC, 200611). Evaluation should include usability and expandability of the existing infrastructure. Implement comprehensive performance monitoring of the ERD area and ensure up-/side- /downgradient monitoring of the flux through ERD biobarriers.

Two (2) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0015AB

AF and USACE approval of the Remedy Evaluation and Recommendations Report.

LF012

(OU 4)

ROD Amendment addressing the 2013 Five-Year Review finding

Four (4) years AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and regulatory signatures on Final ROD Amendment).

LF012

(OU 4)

LTM in accordance with the approved DDs and any post-ROD changes

Upon completion of ROD Amendment through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Assessment Report for Land Use Controls).

OT026

(OU 6)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs (includes incorporating changes based on revisions to the monitoring program)

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

OT026

(OU 6)

Alternate Objectives in accordance with Section 1.2.3 of the PWS including one or more of the following:

1) Advanced Site Characterization (Supplemental Site Investigation and Revised Conceptual Site Model)

2) Remedy Evaluation and Recommendation

3) Decision Document Amendment

Within the POP AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of SSI Report and revised CSM.

AF and USACE approval of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy.

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) or ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ESD or ROD Amendment).

9 US EPA. (2010). Best Management Practices. Washington DC.

10 US EPA. (2014). Groundwater Remedy Completion Strategy. Washington DC.

11 ITRC. (2006). Performance-Based Management. Washington DC: ITRC.

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

OT033

(OU 8)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs (includes incorporating changes based on revisions to the monitoring program)

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

OT033

(OU 8)

Alternate Objectives in accordance with Section 1.2.3 of the PWS including one or more of the following:

1) Advanced Site Characterization (Supplemental Site Investigation) of SSI Report.

AF and USACE approval of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy.

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ESD or ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ESD or ROD Amendment).

OT097

(OU 11)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs and the RD/RA Work Plan and Reduce LCC

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

OT097

(OU 11)

Evaluate and rehabilitate pump and treat and soil vapor extraction (SVE) systems as necessary to achieve the objectives specified in the ROD and RD/RA Work Plan

Two (2) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0019AA

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of system evaluation and rehabilitation.

OT106 Record of Decision Within the POP AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ROD (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ROD).

SD107

(OU 12)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs and Reduce

LCC

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

SD107

(OU 12)

Evaluate effectiveness, efficacy, and adequacy of the existing remedy(ies) per the current ROD and potential mid-plume remedy(ies) (in accordance with USEPA, 2010; USEPA, 2014; and ITRC, 2006)

Two (2) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0021AA

AF and USACE approval of the Remedy Evaluation Report.

SD107

(OU 12)

Decommissioning Evaluation

One (1) year from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0021AC

AF and USACE approval of the Decommissioning Evaluation Report.

SS017

(OU 5)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs and Reduce LCCs

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

SS017

(OU 5)

Abandon Monitoring Points Associated with Lease

USAF-AFMC-KRSM-15-1-0475

30 September

AF and USACE approval of the Monitoring Point Abandonment and Site Restoration Letter Report.

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

SS017

(OU 5)

Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI) at Buildings 1701, 1704, and 1710*

*Upon demolition of the buildings

One (1) year from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0022AD

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of SSI.

SS017

(OU 5)

Decision Document Amendment for Buildings 1701, 1704, and 1710, if warranted

One (1) year from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0022AE

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ESD or ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ESD or ROD Amendment).

SS027

(OU 7)

LTM in accordance with the approved DDs

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual LTM Reports, etc.).

SS030 Response Complete

Upon achievement of RC, continue LTM in accordance with the approved DDs throughout the duration of the

POP

of RC documentation (e.g., AF signature on Final Remedial Action Completion Report).

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Assessment Report for Land Use Controls).

SS089

(OU 9)

Site Closeout Within the POP AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of SC documentation (e.g., Site Closeout Report and Well Abandonment Confirmation Report).

SS090

(OU 9)

Decision Document Amendment Two (2) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0026AA

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ESD or ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ESD or ROD Amendment).

SS090

(OU 9)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs and any post-ROD changes

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

SS091

(OU 5)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

SS109

(OU 10)

Decision Document Amendment

Two (2) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0028AA

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ESD or ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ESD or ROD Amendment).

SS109

(OU 10)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs and any post-ROD changes

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

SS112

(OU 13)

Remedial Investigation Addendum*

*Upon demolition of the buildings

One (1) year from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0029AA

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RI Addendum.

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

ST061 Site Closeout Within the POP AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of SC documentation (e.g., Site Closeout Report and Well Abandonment Confirmation Report).

ST071 Site Closeout Within the POP AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of SC documentation (e.g., Site Closeout Report and Well Abandonment Confirmation Report).

WP005

(OU 3)

Explanation of Significant Differences to support decommissioning extraction system

Five (5) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0032AA

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ESD (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ESD).

WP005

(OU 3)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs and any post-ROD changes and Reduce LCCs

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

WP007

(OU 2)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs (includes incorporating changes based on revisions to the monitoring program)

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

WP007

(OU 2)

Remedial Investigation (RI) for 1,4 Dioxane Two (2) years from the Obligation Date of Sub-CLIN

0033AA

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of the RI.

WP007

(OU 2)

Alternate Objectives in accordance with Section 1.2.3 of the PWS including one or more of the following:

1) Advanced Site Characterization (Supplemental Site Investigation, Revised Conceptual Site Model, and Monitoring Program Update) of SSI Report, revised CSM, CCR and Basewide Monitoring Plan.

AF and USACE approval of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy.

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of ESD or ROD Amendment (i.e., AF and Regulatory signatures on Final ESD or ROD Amendment).

WP008

(OU A)

RA-O in accordance with the approved DDs including addressing all 2020 Five Year Review findings

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M Reports, etc.).

ZZ113

(OU 15)

Interim RA-O (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)

Until achievement of RIP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of IRA-O documentation (e.g., Annual IRA-O Reports, Monthly O&M

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

ZZ113

(OU 15)

Remedy in Place

Upon achievement of RIP, continue RA-O in accordance with the ROD throughout the duration of the

POP

Three (3) years AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RIP (e.g., Construction Completion Report and first RA-O Report demonstrating remedy is operating properly and successfully).

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual RA-O Reports, Monthly O&M

2.0 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

The Contractor shall identify and comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes;

Department of Defense (DoD) and AF instructions, manuals, handbooks, regulations, guidance, and policy letters (including AF policy and guidance for IRP, and MMRP), Executive Orders (EOs), American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), American Petroleum Institute (API) Codes, National Association of Corrosions Engineers (NACE), National Fire Protection (NFPA), Steel Structures and Painting Counsel (SSPC), National Electrical Code (NEC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and International Building Code (IBC) including all changes and amendments in effect on the date of issuance of this contract. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to identify and comply with all applicable requirements. In addition, the Contractor shall refer to the current versions of the DoD Policy and Guidelines for Acquisitions Involving Environmental Sampling or Testing and The United States AF Construction Management Implementation Guide.

The Contractor shall identify and comply with all applicable documents for the Installations including RODs, ROD Amendments, ESDs, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Permits and subsequent modifications, Risk Evaluation Corrective Action Program (RECAP) documents, the Endangered Species Act, other Decision Documents, deeds, discharge permits and conveyance notices.

The information provided in this PWS is not intended as a substitute for complete analysis of technical data available, nor is it intended to be a guide on how the Contractor should address achievement of the POs.

3.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED INFORMATION AND PROPERTY

Government Furnished Information is contained in the Administrative Record (http://afcec.publicadmin-record.us.af.mil) or listed in Enclosure 2. The AF believes the documentation provided represents the most recent and appropriate documentation available for the Installation(s) and sites identified in this PWS. The Contractor is solely responsible for reviewing all available information and forming their own independent, professional conclusions/interpretation of site conditions and requirements to achieve the POs of this contract.

Specific documents not included in the Administrative Record or in Enclosure 2 may be made http://afcec.publicadmin-record.us.af.mil/ available following a request to the Contracting Officer (KO), if the documentation can be distributed in a timely manner. Electronic format is not guaranteed.

The Contractor shall properly account for and manage all new and existing GFP procured and utilized at the Installation as-is where-is in accordance with the applicable Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). Lists of current GFP are provided in Enclosure 3. All Real Property installed during the contract shall be turned over to the Government consistent with procedures identified in section 8.2.3.

The Contractor is responsible for providing all other supplies and equipment, not already installed and not listed in Enclosure 3, that are required to achieve the POs of this contract. All AF owned property, including real property used for remediation purposes must be maintained by the Contractor in accordance with applicable maintenance requirements and usability for the intended purpose. The Contractor is responsible for disposal of unneeded, unusable, or obsolete GFP as required, and transition of remaining GFP to other AF Contractors at the end of the contract POP. Prior to disposal of excess or unserviceable equipment listed in Enclosures 3, the Contractor shall coordinate activities with the KO for disposition instructions.

4.0 MANAGEMENT, PLANNING, AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Contractor shall implement a full range of environmental remediation activities as required to meet objectives of this contract and in accordance with all applicable or relevant and appropriate federal, state, and local laws and regulations; DoD policies; and Installation-specific orders, agreements or rules. The Contractor shall supply all labor, equipment, and materials necessary to accomplish the work through the entire PP of the contract. The Contractor shall perform management and planning functions, including performance measurement and fund status reporting. The IMS, MPS, and PMP shall be consistent.

4.1 Project Management Plan and Work Breakdown Structure

The Contractor shall develop and maintain a detailed PMP. The PMP shall specify the project’s resources and tasks corresponding to the Sub-CLINs for this contract as required for the planning, execution, control, and completion of the stated POs. At a minimum, the PMP shall include the following sections: technical approach for achieving the POs in accordance with the PWS, performance models, organization and integration of the project team, schedule management and project controls, transitional activities, risk management, quality management;

health and safety management, procurement management, and security management. The Contractor is responsible for complying with the AFCEC ORC PMP Guidance and standard industry practice. Clarification on PMP content and the level of detail required to address the ORC program shall be provided by the COR.

The PMP shall include the approved ORC Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS Dictionary. In addition, the WBS shall demonstrate a comprehensive decomposition of each work package/PO deliverable, and exhibit a clear and concise correlation between the PWS, IMS, and MPS. The Contractor is responsible for complying with the guidance for the Development of Contract Line Item Number Structures, Work Breakdown Structures, Integrated

Master Schedules, and Milestone Payment Schedules (CLIN, WBS, IMS, MPS Guidance) in Chapter 4 of the AFCEC ORC PMP Guidance.

Each ORC has a designated WBS Level 3 Element code that is unique to this ORC. This designation will be retained, at a minimum, for the life of the contract. For this Hill AFB ORC, the Level 3 designation is 1.1.8.

The first draft of the PMP shall be due within sixty (60) calendar days of contract award (or a more aggressive schedule if agreed upon). The Draft PMP and subsequent revisions shall be subject to AF and USACE review and approval. The Final PMP shall be due within fourteen

(14) calendar days of receipt of AF and USACE comments on the Draft versions. The contractor shall maintain the PMP throughout the duration of the contract utilizing dated page changes and track change deletions and insertions (electronic copies) as practicable. Whole document PMP updates during the life of the ORC may be necessary based on the accumulation of small incremental changes or significant changes (e.g., contract requirements, technical approaches, risk and issue management, or key personnel). The contractor shall prepare two whole document updates during the POP of the ORC. The AF and USACE will determine when PMP updates are warranted.

4.2 Schedule and Planning Requirements – Integrated Master Schedule

The Contractor shall prepare and submit an IMS in hardcopy and electronic format (Microsoft Project, Microsoft Excel, and Adobe Acrobat portable document file (.pdf)).

The following are minimum AF requirements for the IMS:

• Presents a realistic sequence and timing of all activities and documents necessary to demonstrate achievement of the PO within the PP.

• Organized in a WBS aligned with the CLINs/Sub-CLINs in Section B and includes the following columns in the prescribed order show below:

o Installation Name: Identify Enterprise Environmental, Safety, and Occupational Health Management Information System (EESOH-MIS) Installation Name per Table 1.

o Site Number: Identify EESOH-MIS Site Number per Table 1 and Site Alias, if applicable.

o CLIN/Sub-CLIN: Identify CLIN and/or Sub-CLIN per Section B of the contract.

Note Sub-CLINs for compliance activities (routine regulatory requirements to comply with binding agreements) are denoted as ####CX and Sub-CLINs for performance activities (remedial advancement or progress towards the PO) are denoted as ####AX.

o WBS Element Number Designation/Code.

o Task Description: Include detailed description of all activities (e.g., meetings, permitting, site access, work plans, mobilization, field work, documents, reviews, coordination with stakeholders, etc.) associated with achievement of the PO and a clear indication of regulatory (CERCLA) phase completions (e.g., RIP Achieved, RC Achieved, etc.) and PO achievement.

o Start and Finish Dates: Document Start date and Finish date for each required activity and document including appropriate durations and realistic Government and Regulatory review periods.

a. Include an obligation date, notice to proceed date, or projected award date as the first activity for each Sub-CLIN.

b. Include a clearly identified final field work (e.g., FINAL FIELD ACTIVITY)

Start date and Finish Date for each site (i.e., indicate when the final set of field activities such as injections, groundwater sampling, or others will be complete).

o Milestone Payment Amount: Include negotiated amount consistent with the approved MPS ensuring the sum of all milestone payments equals the value of the CLIN/Sub-CLIN per Section B of the contract.

o Percent Complete: Record completion status of all activities and documents as approved by the COR.

o Predecessor and Successor: Define relationships and constraints associated with activities and documents.

The Contractor shall maintain and submit an IMS monthly in electronic format in accordance with the requirements above and include updates to progress and approved changes (e.g., Government or regulatory review periods, technical approaches, milestone payment updates, or contract requirements). The IMSs shall be submitted electronically to the Contractor’s ORC document repository and in accordance with instructions from the COR. The Contractor shall prepare and maintain the IMS in accordance with the CLIN, WBS, IMS, and MPS Guidance.

4.3 Milestone Payment Schedule

The Contractor shall prepare and submit an MPS monthly (along with the IMS) in hardcopy and in electronic format (Microsoft Excel). The MPS will be negotiated during development of the PMP and approved by the COR.

The following are minimum AF requirements for the MPS:

• Presents appropriate milestone payments considered integral and necessary to the achievement of the POs.

• Includes a reasonable number of milestone payments per CLIN/Sub-CLIN based on the scope and anticipated duration to achieve CLIN/Sub-CLIN objective and/or PO.

• Organized in a WBS aligned with the CLINs/Sub-CLINs in Section B and includes the following columns:

o Installation Name: Identify EESOH-MIS Installation Name per Table 1.

o Site Number: Identify EESOH-MIS Site Number per Table 1 and Site Alias, if applicable.

o CLIN/Sub-CLIN: Identify CLIN and/or Sub-CLIN per Section B of the contract.

Note Sub-CLINs for compliance activities (routine regulatory requirements to comply with binding agreements) are denoted as ####CX and Sub-CLINs for performance activities (remedial advancement or progress towards the PO) are denoted as ####AX.

o Milestone Payment Identification Number: Include unique number assigned to each milestone payment for tracking purposes.

o Milestone Payment Description: Include detailed description of definable and measurable step considered integral and necessary to the achievement…