Draft PWS dtd 3 Dec 2019 - OK-AR Group ORC.pdf

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

FOR

OKLAHOMA, ARKANSAS GROUP

OPTIMIZED REMEDIATION CONTRACT

AT

AIR FORCE PLANT 3, OKLAHOMA;

ALTUS AIR FORCE BASE, OKLAHOMA;

LITTLE ROCK AIR FORCE BASE, ARKANSAS;

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, OKLAHOMA; AND

VANCE AIR FORCE BASE, OKLAHOMA

CONTRACT NUMBER: TBD

3 December 2019

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION. SEE FAR 3.104.

Version 8.0

1.0 SCOPE

This requirement is for environmental remediation services at Air Force Plant (AFP) 3, Altus Air Force Base (AFB), Little Rock AFB, Tinker AFB, and Vance AFB. 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 65 sites, which include 64 Installation Restoration Program (IRP) sites and one Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP) site.

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 Air Force has no control and, as such, will be referred to as “regulators”.

1.1 Introduction

The following facilities are included in this Optimized Remediation Contract (ORC).

AIR FORCE PLANT 3

AFP 3 is located on the northeastern side of Tulsa, Oklahoma, adjacent to Tulsa International Airport. The property was originally used by the Douglas Aircraft Co. from 1941 to 1945 for the manufacture, assembly, and maintenance of aircraft for the US Army Air Corps. After the war, the plant site was used for the manufacture, maintenance, and repair of a variety of aircraft as well as components of the Saturn V rocket, the space shuttle, and the International Space Station.

The property was also used by Tinker AFB for storage. Ownership of the land was transferred to the city of Tulsa in the 1990s. Currently, AFP 3 has six subleases to Tulsa, including a lease to the bus division of International Harvester for the manufacture and maintenance of school buses, and a lease to Spirit International (Boeing) for aircraft and space systems component manufacturing.

Remediation activities at AFP 3 are being conducted pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Regulatory oversight is provided by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ). The RCRA Permit has expired and there are no plans to renew the RCRA Permit. Work is occurring on a voluntary basis. The AF still submit documents to

ODEQ.

ALTUS AIR FORCE BASE

Altus AFB is located in the City of Altus in Jackson County in southwestern Oklahoma. It occupies 5,983 acres and is bordered by the City of Altus on the west, Highway 62 on the south, and agricultural land on the north and east. Construction on Altus AFB began in 1942 and the Installation began operating as a flight-training Installation in 1943. It is currently managed by the 97th Air Mobility Wing under the Air Education and Training Command (AETC), which operates KC-135 Stratotanker and C-17 Globemaster III aircraft from the Installation. Historical waste generation and disposal activities that may have contributed to environmental contamination include equipment cleaning, aircraft cleaning, and fire training activities. Waste materials potentially generated include chemicals from cleaning solutions, solvents, oil and grease, and JP-4 fuel.

Remediation activities at Altus AFB are being conducted pursuant to RCRA. On November 6, 1996, the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued Unilateral Final Administrative Order (Order), Docket No. RCRA-VI-002(h)-95-H, pursuant to Section 3008(h) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. §6928(h). The Order specified the legal and technical requirements for Altus AFB to follow in performing corrective action. The RCRA Corrective Action Permit No. 9571824045- CA (Permit) replaced the 3008(h) Order. USEPA vacated/terminated the 3008(h) Order on 23 March 2010, and ODEQ became the lead agency under the Permit. The Permit is an enforceable document identifying specific requirements for the remedial operations at Altus AFB. Section III.E.4 requires all deliverables be submitted to ODEQ and USEPA. The RCRA Permit expires in January 2020. The application for renewal has been submitted for ODEQ review.

LITTLE ROCK AIR FORCE BASE

Little Rock AFB is located in Jacksonville, Arkansas, 17 miles northeast of Little Rock. It began after conversion of the former Arkansas Ordnance Plant in 1953 for use as a medium jet bomber Installation. The Installation presently comprises 6,128 acres operated by the 19th Airlift Wing/Air Mobility Command with a mission for worldwide training of C-130 aircrew as well as to support a variety of transient aircraft.

Environmental restoration work is being performed pursuant to both the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and RCRA with the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) serving as the lead agency. There is a Consent Administrative Order (CAO), signed on 17 February 2000, the Final Remedial Action Decision Document dated 6 November 2014, and subsequent amendments to satisfy corrective action obligations.

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE

Tinker AFB is located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Tinker AFB encompasses approximately 5,200 acres and is surrounded by residential, commercial, and industrial developments. Tinker AFB is a maintenance depot Installation and also supports a flying mission.

Tinker AFB is working under a Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA) signed December 1988 with four Operable Units (OUs 1-4) managed as one primary IRP site (OT001). OT001, Building 3001, is on the National Priority List (NPL) with activities conducted pursuant to the CERCLA under the FFA. Due to the physical location and proximity to OT001, remedial activities at ST003, North Tank Area, require coordination with activities and requirements at OT001. Tinker AFB has one active MMRP Site FR884 with activities conducted pursuant to the CERCLA.

Other sites and associated remediation activities are managed and performed under a RCRA Hazardous Waste Management Permit #1571724391, which was issued by the ODEQ and the USEPA Region VI on July 1, 1991, and subsequently renewed on August 12, 2002. The Permit and associated sites are managed by ODEQ. The next Permit renewal is ongoing.

Environmental activities at Tinker AFB sites are overseen by USEPA Region VI, ODEQ, and the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC). Both USEPA Region VI and ODEQ oversee sites OT001, FR884, and ST003; however, USEPA Region VI is the lead agency. ODEQ is the lead agency for the RCRA sites. OCC is the lead agency for the State Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites.

VANCE AIR FORCE BASE

Vance AFB is located in north-central Oklahoma, within the city of Enid, and occupies about 2,122 acres. The Installation has been used for pilot training since its construction in 1942. It is currently managed by the 71st Flying Training Wing under AETC.

Environmental restoration projects under the IRP are being conducted pursuant to the RCRA program with ODEQ as the Lead agency. There is no USEPA involvement. Vance AFB must comply with the RCRA Post-Closure Care Permit and the Industrial User Permit. The RCRA Post-Closure Care Permit No. 4571524095-PC issued 30 September 2010 by ODEQ expires on 30 September 2020. The Permit renewal application is due 180 days prior to the expiration date.

Until a new Permit is issued, the 2010 Permit will remain in effect even after the expiration date.

The Industrial User Permit is with the City of Enid for publicly-owned treatment works (POTW) and requires compliance for sampling and analysis of the Central Groundwater Treatment Facility (if applicable). The State LUST program is administered by the OCC.

1.2 Overview of Optimized Remediation Contract 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 general 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 – Alternate Objective Site Consideration Summary(ies)

• Enclosure 3 – Government Furnished Property (Gfp)

• Attachment 1 – ORC Program Management Plan (PMP) Guidance

• Attachment 2 – Draft Contractor Progress Status Management Report

• Attachment 3 – Optimization Benefit Template

• Attachment 4 – AFFF Related Waste Management Implementation Guidance

• Attachment 5 – Ensuring Chemistry Data Quality Fact Sheet – April 2013

• Attachment 6 – Field Sampling Protocol for PFOA, PFOS, and PFBS Guidance – June

• Attachment 7 – Interim Air Force Guidance on 1,4 Dioxane

• Attachment 8 – Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Template

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 Optimized Remediation Contract (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 LCC. 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.

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 the 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 goals. These POs 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 (CLIN) for each 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/SC during the POP, work planning documents shall contain the performance model. Final performance models, subject to be modified as needed during the life of the contract, shall be submitted as part of the Work Plan required under PWS section

6.1.2. The 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 the “Optimized Remediation Contract (ORC) Program Management Plan (PMP) Guidance, Version 1.”

• 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 (OES)

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 RODs, or other equivalent remedial DD. The Contractor is responsible for implementing changes to the monitoring program based on activities conducted in the Advanced Site Characterization as described in 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:

1. Achieving RC is expected to require substantially longer than 30 years;

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

3. Achieving RC is anticipated to require advanced site characterization technologies to improve the 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 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 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. The project scoping sessions shall include the Installation Point(s) of Contact (POC[s]), the AFCEC Program Manager, the AF technical support team, and USACE Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). After contract award and approval by the AF and USACE, 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; and

(C) Develop remediation design parameters for recommended technology(ies).

Advanced Site Characterization includes one or more of 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 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 COCs, as required. The contractor shall evaluate the need for, and collect the following data where appropriate: (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 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/hydrogeologic 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:

a. Remedy performance in treatment areas

b. Hydrogeology, plume geometry, horizontal and vertical plume stability, and matrix diffusion across site

c. Plume migration through use of perimeter/boundary wells and sentinel wells

Based on the well network evaluation, and with coordination and approval by the Government and regulators (if required), the Contractor shall optimize the monitoring well network to include adjusting sampling 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 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.

1.2.3.2 Remedy Evaluation and Recommendation

Based on all existing data as well as 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 shall include a cost-benefit analyses and evaluation of the usability, expandability, and/or discontinued use of any existing infrastructure. All remedy recommendations must include a 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 (i.e., more than 30 years). 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 and 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 Decision Document to augment, modify, and/or replace the existing remedy. If warranted, the Contractor shall update the Decision Document.

1.2.4 Remedial Action – Operation and Reduce Life-cycle Cost /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 Performance Objective 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 Response Complete (RC), have remedies that are effective (source control, risk mitigation, and plume stability) and have the potential for LCC reduction through a variety of optimization actions, for example:

• Reducing frequency of events (e.g., sampling, inspections);

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.

• 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 RA-O 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 RA-O activities are contingent upon regulatory approval.

• 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 optimization activities to date, as well as 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 or LTM as the Performance Objective 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

Performance Standard

N/A 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

Updates 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.

N/A Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Draft QASP within 60 calendar days from contract award

Update as necessary throughout the

POP

AF and USACE approval of

QASP

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

N/A 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

Updates monthly throughout the

POP

AF and USACE approval of

IMS/MPS

N/A Basewide Quality Program Plans (QPP) for each Installation

Draft Basewide QPP within 60 calendar days from contract award

Update as necessary throughout the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of Basewide QPP

See Section 8.1.1.1.f for site list

1,4-Dioxane Sampling (Phase 1) One (1) Year AF and USACE approval of Technical Memorandum/Report (one per installation)

N/A Annual Contractor Manpower Reporting Throughout the duration of the

POP

Accepted Annual Report

AFP 3

LF006

(Solid Waste Management Unit

[SWMU] 5)

Long Term Management (LTM) in accordance with the approved Statement of Basis (SoB) (includes incorporating revisions to the LTM protocol based on the SoB amendment for VOCs and 1,4-dioxane)

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, etc.)

LF006

(SWMU 5)

Remedy in Place (RIP) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 1,4-dioxane

Five (5) years AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RIP for VOCs and 1,4-dioxane (e.g., Construction Completion Report (CCR) and first remedy operations report demonstrating remedy is operating properly and successfully)

OT010

(includes

AOC-01)

(SWMU 8)

LTM in accordance with the approved SoB (includes incorporating revisions to the LTM protocol based on the SoB amendment for VOCs and 1,4-dioxane)

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, etc.)

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

OT010

(includes

AOC-01)

(SWMU 8)

RIP for VOCs and 1,4-dioxane Five (5) years AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RIP for VOCs and 1,4-dioxane (e.g., CCR and first remedy operations report demonstrating remedy is operating properly and successfully)

Altus AFB N/A Abandon wells installed for the site investigations that are not included in the permitted monitoring systems (Groundwater Management Unit [GWMU] 1, GWMU 2, GWMU 3, and GWMU 4). Develop prioritization criteria with the Installation POC(s).

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

(0020AA –

0020AK)

AF and USACE approval of the well abandonment plan(s) and completion report(s)

N/A Develop a Basewide Monitoring Plan

Update the Basewide Monitoring Plan as needed throughout the duration of the POP as part of the RA-O/LTM requirements.

One (1) year AF and USACE approval of the Basewide Monitoring Plan

FT003

(SWMU 3 –

GWMU 4)

Remedial Action-Operations (RA-O)9 in accordance with the RCRA Corrective Action (CA) Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

FT005

(SWMU 2 –

GWMU 2)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

FT007

(SWMU 4 –

GWMU 4)

LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

LF004

(SWMU 7 –

GWMU 4)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit including:

1) Developing and following an O&M

Manual

2) Refreshing biowall carbon at the start of the contract and as required based on the O&M Manual and Permit requirements.

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

9 RA-O for all applicable sites at Altus AFB shall include collecting data from RA-O activities such as groundwater contaminant concentrations and biogeochemical data to use in RA-O reports to 1) identify changing contaminant concentrations/mass over time, 2) demonstrate whether aquifer redox and biogeochemical conditions have been modified as planned, 3) detect changes in environmental conditions that may optimize or reduce the effectiveness of the bioremediation system, and 4) determine the rate and extent of biodegradation.

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

LF008

(SWMU 5)

LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

LF014

(SWMU 8 –

GWMU 4)

Response Complete (RC)

Upon achievement of RC, continue LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit throughout the duration of the POP

Five (5) years AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RC documentation (e.g., Corrective Measures Completion Report and Class 2 Permit Modification)

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

SS010

(SWMU 21 –

GWMU 1)

LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit including incorporating changes based on revisions to the monitoring program

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

SS010

(SWMU 21 –

GWMU 1)

Alternate Objectives10 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)

2) Remedy Evaluation and Recommendation

3) Decision Document Amendment

Within the POP AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of SSI Report, revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

10 The Alternate Objectives for the following sites in GWMU 1 including SS010, SS016, SS017, SS018, SS022, SS023, ST012, and WP002 shall be managed as a unit. The Contractor shall submit one document for GWMU 1 rather than one document for each site (e.g., one SSI report instead of eight).

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

SS013

(AOC 2 –

GWMU 2)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

SS016

(AOC 6 –

GWMU 1)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit including 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 Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

SS016

(AOC 6 –

GWMU 1)

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)

2) Remedy Evaluation and revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

SS017

(GWMU 1)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit (including all attachments) including the following:

1) Optimize existing remedies

2) Implement corrective measures in the

Permit, as needed, including contingency actions

3) Prepare and utilize Operations and Maintenance (O&M) manuals (for the biowall, bioreactor, and EVO injection point, as applicable) with specific performance metrics, performance goals, and performance monitoring parameters

4) Incorporate changes based on revisions to the monitoring program

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O/LTM documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

O&M Manuals

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

SS017

(GWMU 1)

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)

2) Remedy Evaluation and revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

SS018

(GWMU 1)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit (including all attachments) including the following:

1) Optimize existing remedies

2) Implement corrective measures in the

Permit, as needed, including contingency actions

3) Prepare and utilize Operations and Maintenance (O&M) manuals (for the biowall, bioreactor, and EVO injection point, as applicable) with specific performance metrics, performance goals, and performance monitoring parameters

4) Incorporate changes based on revisions to the monitoring program

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O/LTM documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

SS018

(GWMU 1)

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)

2) Remedy Evaluation and revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

SS022

(GWMU 1)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit (including all attachments) including the following:

1) Optimize existing remedies

2) Implement corrective measures in the

Permit, as needed, including contingency actions

3) Prepare and utilize Operations and Maintenance (O&M) manuals (for the biowall, bioreactor, and EVO injection point, as applicable) with specific performance metrics, performance goals, and performance monitoring parameters

4) Incorporate changes based on revisions to the monitoring program

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O/LTM documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

SS022

(GWMU 1)

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)

2) Remedy Evaluation and revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

SS023

(GWMU 1)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit including 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 Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

SS023

(GWMU 1)

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)

2) Remedy Evaluation and revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

SS024

(GWMU 3)

RA-O in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Annual Groundwater Monitoring Reports, Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

ST012

(SWMU 26 –

GWMU 1)

LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit including incorporating changes based on revisions to the monitoring program

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

ST012

(SWMU 26 –

GWMU 1)

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)

2) Remedy Evaluation and revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

ST025

(SWMU 11)

LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

WP001

(SWMU 9)

LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, etc.)

WP002

(SWMU 10 –

GWMU 1)

LTM in accordance with the RCRA CA Permit including incorporating changes based on revisions to the monitoring program

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Remedy Protectiveness Evaluation, Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

WP002

(SWMU 10 –

GWMU 1)

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

4) Advanced Site Characterization (Supplemental Site Investigation, Revised Conceptual Site Model, and Monitoring Program Update)

5) Remedy Evaluation and

6) Decision Document Amendment revised CSM, CCR, Basewide Monitoring Plan Update, and Class 2 RCRA Permit Modification (if applicable)

Government approval through the COR of the remedy evaluation and recommended proposed remedial strategy including successful demonstration of the existing or alternate remedy (e.g., through pilot or field test) showing decreasing trends in COCs

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RCRA CA Permit Modification (including all applicable attachments)

Little Rock AFB N/A Update the Land Use Control Implementation

Plan (LUCIP) to include all sites (particularly LF013 and ST025).

Implement LUC inspections & maintenance annually as part of the RA-O or LTM requirements for each site.

One (1) year AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LUCIP

N/A Update the Community Involvement Plan (CIP) at award and every five years starting in

FY24

One (1) year from the award of the (CIP) Sub- CLINs (0042AA

-0042AC)

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of CIP

DP051 LTM in accordance with the approved Remedial Action Decision Document (RADD) and Consent Administrative Order

(CAO)

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Land Use Control Inspection Reports)

LF007 LTM in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Land Use Control Inspection Reports)

LF008 LTM in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Land Use Control Inspection Reports)

LF010 LTM in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Land Use Control Inspection Reports)

Site Performance Objective Performance Period

Performance Standard

LF013 RA-O in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of RA-O documentation (e.g., Five Year Groundwater Monitoring Report, Annual RA-O Report, Semi-Annual Inspections/Quarterly Maintenance (if needed), Land Use Control Inspection Reports etc.)

LF030 LTM in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Land Use Control Inspection Reports)

LF046 LTM in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Land Use Control Inspection Reports)

ST006 LTM in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LTM documentation (e.g., Land Use Control Inspection Reports)

ST025 RA-O in accordance with the approved RADD and CAO

Through the duration of the

POP

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

Tinker AFB N/A Create two LUCIPs, one for the NPL sites, and one for all other sites (the non-NPL LUCIP should include landfill maintenance requirements).

Maintain and update the LUCIP as sites complete their decision documents, or as needed due to changes.

One (1) year AF, USACE, and regulatory approval of LUCIPs

N/A Develop a Basewide Monitoring Plan

Update the Basewide Monitoring Plan as needed throughout the duration of the POP as part of the RA-O/LTM or compliance requirements.

One (1) year AF and USACE approval of the Basewide Monitoring Plan

N/A Basewide well abandonment…