W912DW19R0010R0003-Solicitation_Amendment_(Final).pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment (R0003) is to answ er the attached questions, delete Footnote 3 from the Sample Project Performance Work Statement (PWS), and to provide the January 2017 hydrosurvey metadata in .xml f ile format.

See the follow ing changes in red.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 3

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 19-Mar-2019

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912DW19R0010

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Mar-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

19-Mar-2019

CODE

USA ENGINEER DISTRICT, SEATTLE

ATTN: CENWS-CT

4735 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, BLDG. 1202

SEATTLE WA 98134-2388

W912DW 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DW19R0010

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Q&A 2

1. Can the vertical datum of the January 2017 survey data be provided to bidders?

Response: We recommend that you access and download the Olympia Harbor January 2017 survey data from the public website link provided in Amendment 2; the .zip download file from that site includes the metadata files. The vertical datum is mean lower low water. Horizontal datum is Washington state plane north 4602. We are also providing the .xml metadata file as part of this amendment.

2. Please clarify if we need to submit the electronic ArcGIS shapefiles or geodatabase showing the DMMU boundaries as part of the SAP submittal for this proposal.

Response: Please do not submit electronic ArcGIS shapefiles or geodatabase files as this requirement is for a ‘draft’ Sample Analysis Plan.

3. Please clarify if matrix spike and matrix spike duplicates are required. The scope includes only duplicates which does not match the DMMP User Manual requirements.

Response: Matrix spike and matrix spike duplicates should be included per the requirements outlined in the DMMP User Manual for each analysis.

4. Footnote 3 states that the analytical costs for Task 3 should be based on the number of samples determined in the SAP. This contradicts other sections of the scope that state to cost the project based on 6 samples only.

Response: Footnote 3 is incorrect. The analytical cost estimate for Task 3 should be based on 6 composite DMMU samples only. The Sample Project PWS has been updated to reflect this change.

W912DW19R0010

(End of Summary of Changes)

G-1 Note: This is a fictitious project whose sole purpose is the evaluation of responses to the MATOC RFP. Actual dredging of this segment of the Olympia Harbor is not planned.

Sample Project Performance Work Statement

Dredged Material Characterization of the

Olympia Harbor Federal Navigation Channel Olympia, Washington

NOTE TO CONTRACTORS

This performance work statement (PWS) is a fictitious scenario to be used to generate the following items:

• A 'draft' sample Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) as required per Factor B of the MATOC Evaluation Criteria

• A bid schedule for sediment characterization as required per Factor D of the MATOC Evaluation Criteria. The bid schedule should be submitted with Volume 2.

No actual sediment sampling, analysis or data reporting is required for this requirement.

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. BACKGROUND

The Olympia Harbor Federal Navigation Project in Olympia, Washington was authorized by Congress in the Rivers and Harbors Acts of 1925 and 1930. The USACE is responsible for dredging portions of the authorized project as needed to maintain navigation.

The authorized depth of the main channel is minus 30 feet (mean lower low water, MLLW). The authorized dimension for the west access channel bottom width is 350 feet, with suitable widening where the access channel joins the main channel. The turning basin adjacent to the Port Terminal has an authorized depth of -30 ft MLLW and dimensions of 300 to 760 ft wide by 3,150 ft long. The authorized depth and width of the East Bay entrance and access channel is shallower and narrower, as shown in Table 1 below. Design side slopes are 2H:1V throughout.

Table 1. Olympia Harbor Navigation Channel Project Features

Feature Stations Authorized Depth

(ft MLLW) Width (ft) Side slope (Horizontal:

Vertical) Main Channel 0+00 to 102+56 -30 500 (wider at turns) 2H:1V

West Access Channel 102+56 to

126+61 -30 350 (wider at turns) 2H:1V

Turning Basin 126+61 to

156+50 -30 Varies: 350 to 760 2H:1V East Bay Entrance and

Access Channel 0+00 to 37+30 -13 150 2H:1V

37+30 to 67+35 -13 100 2H:1V Floating Breakwater

Access Channel (East Bay) 38+67 to 40+66 -12 176 2H:1V

ATTACHMENT 3

G-2 Note: This is a fictitious project whose sole purpose is the evaluation of responses to the MATOC RFP. Actual dredging of this segment of the Olympia Harbor is not planned.

Characterization Summary Accreted sediment in the waterway has been characterized by USACE under the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) program or the Dredged Material Management Program (DMMP) multiple times. Table 2 summarizes the past characterizations:

Table 2. Olympia Harbor Navigation Channel Sediment Characterization Summary

Sampling Year

Characterization Type

Sampling method

Volume characterized (CY) Ranking

1988 Partial characterization van Veen grab 535,185 M, H 1988 Full characterization vibracore 535,185 LM, M, H 1999 Full characterization cores 624,000 Low

2005 Recency Determination NA 458,734 Low

2006 Dioxin and limited PAH evaluation cores 458,734 High

2014 Dioxin data re-evaluation NA NA High

1988 Partial and Full Characterizations Two rounds of sediment characterization occurred in 1988: a Partial Characterization for the purposes of considering a down-ranking, followed by a Full Characterization.

1999 Full Characterization In 1999, the overall project area was expanded with the inclusion of the Port of Olympia’s berthing area and underwent a full suite of sediment characterization testing at a low rank. The standard list of DMMP chemicals of concern (COCs) was analyzed, and a tiered testing approach for tributyltin (TBT) was used. There were no exceedances of any of the standard COCs, but there were exceedances of the Bioaccumulation Trigger (BT) for TBT at two locations in the turning basin and berthing area. Bioaccumulation testing for TBT was conducted, and both samples passed bioaccumulation testing.

2005 Recency Extension In 2005, the Dredged Material Management Program (DMMP) granted a recency extension, finding that no additional testing was necessary if dredging occurred prior to May 2008.

2006 Dioxin and Limited PAH Testing Subsequent to the Recency Extension, concerns regarding possible dioxin contamination in Budd Inlet resulted in additional characterization of the federal navigation channel for dioxins/furans and limited PAH testing in 2006. No PAH exceedances were found, but dioxin concentrations were high throughout the majority of the Olympia Harbor project. As a result only limited dredging of the northern portion of the main channel was conducted.

2014 Dioxin Data Re-evaluation In 2014, the DMMP reviewed new and existing dioxin data available since 2006. That review concluded that shoals previously found unsuitable due to elevated dioxin concentrations—but

G-3 Note: This is a fictitious project whose sole purpose is the evaluation of responses to the MATOC RFP. Actual dredging of this segment of the Olympia Harbor is not planned.

not yet dredged--remained unsuitable for open-water disposal. Other areas with more recent dredging or accumulation required full characterization to determine open-water suitability.

January 2017 USACE Condition Survey A bathymetric survey of the Olympia Harbor was conducted by the USACE in January 2017 and indicates that significant shoaling has occurred above the authorized depth (Figure 2).

2017 Dredged Material Characterization The USACE plans to dredge the main navigation channel and turning basin areas between stations 101+00 and 156+50 to provide adequate water depth for navigation (Figure 1). The dredging design depth is the authorized depth (-30 ft MLLW) plus two feet of overdepth (to -32 ft MLLW).

The purpose of this PWS is to provide information required by the DMMP agencies to make a determination regarding the suitability of the proposed dredged material for disposal at a non-dispersive site.

For the purposes of this sample project PWS, the federal navigation channel (which includes the west access channel and turning basin) is ranked “low-moderate” by the DMMP agencies for concern for potential contamination1.

1 In reality, Olympia Harbor is ranked high; for this fictitious project, a rank of low-moderate shall be used to design the SAP.

G-4 Note: This is a fictitious project whose sole purpose is the evaluation of responses to the MATOC RFP. Actual dredging of this segment of the Olympia Harbor is not planned.

Figure 1. Olympia Harbor Overview Map

G-1 Note: This is a fictitious project whose sole purpose is the evaluation of responses to the MATOC RFP. Actual dredging of this segment of the Olympia Harbor is not planned.

Figure 2. Shoaling in the Olympia Harbor Navigation Channel and Turning Basin (Jan 2017 Bathymetry)

1.2. OBJECTIVES

The basic objectives for this work order are: (a) to prepare a sampling and analysis plan (SAP) that describes in detail how to sample and characterize the sediments in the proposed dredging area and shall be suitable for submission to the DMMP agencies for approval, (b) to sample and characterize the sediments in the proposed dredging area as described in detail in the SAP, and (c) to provide a report to document this characterization that can then be used by the DMMP to make a suitability determination. This PWS includes preparation of the SAP, sampling and analysis of dredged material, validation of data, preparation of a data report, and EIM data entry.

1.3. SCOPE

The scope of this PWS includes the following tasks. The requirements for each task are described in more detail in Section 2 (“Specific Tasks”).

• Task 1. SAP Preparation

• Task 2. Dredged Material Sampling/Processing

• Task 3. Analysis of Sediment Conventionals, Standard COCs, TBT, and Dioxins/Furans

• Task 4. Data Validation

• Task 5. Data Report

• Task 6. EIM Data Entry

1.4. ACRONYMS

BT Bioaccumulation Trigger COC Chemical of Concern CRM Certified Reference Material CTR Contract Technical Representative DA Department of the Army DL Detection Limit DMMO Dredged Material Management Office DMMP Dredged Material Management Program DMMU Dredged Material Management Unit DNR Department of Natural Resources DOD Department of Defense EDL Estimated Detection Limit EIM Environmental Information Management EMPC Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration EPA Environmental Protection Agency ML Maximum Level MLLW Mean Lower Low Water NAD North American Datum PAH Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl PCDD Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxin PCDF Polychlorinated Dibenzofuran POC Point of Contact PSEP Puget Sound Estuary Program PWS Performance Work Statement QA Quality Assurance QAP Quality Assurance Program QC Quality Control QCP Quality Control Plan RL Reporting Limit SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan SIM Selective Ion Monitoring SL Screening Level SMARM Sediment Management Annual Review Meeting SRM Standard Reference Material SVOC Semivolatile Organic Compound TBT Tributyltin TE Technical Exhibit TOC Total Organic Carbon TVS Total Volatile Solids USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

2. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY, EQUIPMENT, AND SERVICES

The Government shall provide materials and services listed below:

a. Corps hydrosurvey data from January 2017 for the Olympia Harbor in xyz format.

b. Channel data in .dgn. format

3. CONTRACTOR FURNISHED ITEMS AND SERVICES

With the exception of any government furnished property, the Contractor shall furnish all services, labor, materials, supplies, and equipment required to conduct the work required under this PWS. All work covered under this PWS is subject to the availability of funds.

4. SPECIFIC TASKS

4.1. BASIC SERVICES

The contractor shall provide services for dredged material characterization of the Federal Navigation Project in Olympia Harbor, Olympia, Washington.

4.2. LIST OF SPECIFIC TASKS

4.2.1. Task 1. Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) Preparation

The Contractor will develop a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) that follows the guidance found in the most recent DMMP User Manual; updates to DMMP implemented via the sediment management annual review meeting (SMARM) process; and the specific sampling and analysis requirements found in this PWS.

Volumes Using the January 2017 bathymetry data, the navigation channel boundaries and side slopes of 1V:2H, the Contractor will calculate the volume of material that requires characterization.

This volume will include the authorized channel depth and the two feet of overdepth for the Olympia Harbor Federal Navigation Channel between stations 101+00 and 156+50. The calculated volume information shall be presented in a table in the SAP. The overdepth volume shall be shown in a separate column, and the total project volume for the project will be shown in the final column of the table. A contingency factor is not required.

Example table format for displaying calculated volumes (in cubic yards). The volumes included in this example table are placeholders and are to be replaced by the Contractor’s calculated volumes.

Area Volume to authorized depth (-30 ft MLLW)

2 ft Overdepth (-30 to -32 ft)

Total Estimated Volume Including Overdepth

A 200,000 100,000 300,000

Number of samples and DMMUs Using the calculated volumes, the Contractor will determine the minimum number of DMMUs, delineate the DMMUs, and propose target sampling locations that adequately represent the DMMUs and provide sufficient volumes for testing.

For the final SAP submittal, the Contractor will include electronic ArcGIS shapefiles or a geodatabase showing the DMMU boundaries and target sampling locations.

Sampling The SAP shall provide detailed sampling and processing procedures, including a description for bioassays and associated QA/QC requirements. Sample sizes must account for both chemical and potential toxicity testing. The sample size does not need to include extra material for bioaccumulation testing.

Analyses Analysis requirements for this characterization will include grain-size, sediment conventionals, standard DMMP chemicals of concern, dioxins, TBT (bulk sediments), and tiered bioassays. Bioaccumulation testing does not need to be included. The required analyses, recommended methods, and DMMP-specific modifications presented in the DMMP User Manual must be followed.

Analyses for dioxins/furans and bulk sediment TBT are required; all necessary QA requirements must be included in the SAP, including relevant language and tables from DMMP (2010a) and DMMP (2010b). 100% of dioxin data will be subjected to Stage 2b data validation and 10% of the dioxin data will undergo Stage 4 data validation. Data validation will be performed by an independent data validator with a minimum of two years of experience validating dioxin data.

Bioassays Bioassay testing is not required in the base program; however, all necessary procedures and QA requirements for bioassay (toxicity testing) must be included in the SAP. Description of bioassays and associated QA/QC requirements must include both termination protocols (standard and resuspension) for the larval test, along with the criteria that will be used to determine which protocol to use. Species-selection criteria must also be included for the amphipod and larval tests. Only the ash-free dry-weight endpoint will be used for the Neanthes test.

Details pertaining to the sampling and testing of bioassay reference-sediment samples will include a field wet-sieving protocol. The wet-sieving protocol needs to include the sediment subsampling procedure to ensure that the material tested using the protocol is representative of the material that will later be analyzed for grain size and used in the bioassays.

Laboratory analysis of reference sediments must include sediment conventionals.

Puget Sound Sediment Reference Material Chemical analysis of the Puget Sound Sediment Reference Material (PS-SRM) shall be run with each batch of sediment samples tested that includes PCB Aroclors and/or dioxins/furans. Acceptance limits must be provided in the SAP, along with communication and contingency measures should the acceptance limits not be met. The Contractor is responsible for ordering the PS-SRM in time for within-batch analytical testing.

Quality Assurance Requirements

Chemistry quality assurance described in the SAP must include the elements of the DMMP User Manual, which include the following (in addition to other standard laboratory QA):

• Laboratory duplicates (frequency of analysis = 1 for every 20 samples or 1 per batch, whichever is more frequent) for standard DMMP chemicals of concern and dioxins/furans.

• Laboratory triplicates (frequency of analysis = 1 for every 20 samples or 1 per batch, whichever is more frequent) for all sediment conventionals.

• Sediment reference material (e.g., certified or standard reference material; frequency of analysis = 1 for every 20 samples or 1 per batch, whichever is more frequent) for semivolatiles, pesticides/PCBs, metals, dioxins/furans and total organic carbon. The DMMP Puget Sound Sediment Reference Material will be used for PCBs and dioxins/furans.

The SAP must plan for enough sediment to be collected from appropriate DMMUs to provide sufficient material for the required laboratory replicates.

Required Figures The Contractor shall create and include one or more figures in the SAP that demonstrate the following features:

• Overview map showing location of project site and project boundaries;

• Bathymetric depths with color-shaded contours; those areas with shoaling above the authorized or project depth shall be clearly visible;

• Map showing proposed DMMU boundaries and field sampling locations

• (optional) cross sectional figure(s) showing relationship between surface and subsurface DMMUs

• (optional) any other project planning details or other pertinent aspects of the project best presented in figure format.

Required Tables The Contractor shall create and include one or more tables in the SAP to present the following information:

• Calculated volumes for dredging to the authorized depth and over depth;

• DMMU Dredged material volumes

• Target sampling locations including DMMU, location ID, mudline elevation (ft MLLW), design depth, overdepth, Z-depth, location coordinates, required core lengths to be assigned to DMMUs and Z-samples

• Sample types, containers, holding times, preservatives, and storage requirements

• A list of DMMP chemical parameters, analysis method, laboratory detection and reporting limits, and DMMP chemical criteria

• Laboratory QA/QC requirements

• (optional) any other project planning details or other pertinent aspects of the project best presented in table format

Review

The draft SAP will be reviewed by the DMMP agencies and combined agency comments will be provided to the Contractor2. Based on the comments received, the Contractor shall develop a final SAP. The final SAP must be submitted before sampling is scheduled to begin.

Between the time that the SAP is approved by USACE and the commencement of work outlined in the SAP, a conference call may be held with the Contractor, CTR and each subcontractor at the request of USACE.

4.2.2. Task 2. Dredged-Material Sampling/Processing

Sediment samples will be collected by the Contractor in accordance with the approved sampling plan.

For the purpose of the bid estimate, the base price for Task 2 will cover a total of 24 cores. Please use this number of cores when generating a cost estimate for Task 2. This quantity does NOT reflect the actual expected number of cores. Collection of cores beyond the first 24 (as determined during the SAP preparation by the Contractor in Task 1) shall be covered by exercising Option Tasks.

The Contractor will provide a vessel (or other sampling platform) and sampling equipment capable of collecting sediment samples to the full potential depth of dredging, including overdepth, plus 2-ft Z-samples (i.e., to -34 ft MLLW). The vessel and vessel navigation system must be capable of positioning the sampling device within 10 feet of target sampling locations, maintaining position during sampling, and recording sample positions with a minimum of 3-foot accuracy. Position, water depths, tidal stage, penetration and recovery must be recorded.

On-board instrumentation/equipment must be capable of either determining: 1) water depths to within 6 inches (corrected and converted to mudline elevations (MLLW) using an on-site tide board); or 2) mudline elevations to within 6 inches (MLLW) using real-time kinematic GPS with water levels referenced to MLLW at the site. The Task 2 pricing shall include the vessel, captain, crew and mob/demob.

The Contractor will provide personnel experienced in sediment sampling to collect the sediment samples onboard the vessel, and to log, photograph and composite those samples (either onboard the vessel or in a processing facility).

The Contractor will provide appropriate sample jars, labels, equipment cleaner, chemicals for fixing sulfides samples, sampling equipment (stainless steel bowls and spoons, etc.), cold packs, and coolers for holding samples in the field until they can be transported to the laboratory for processing and analysis.

Excess sediment may be returned to the waterway in the general location from which it was collected. The Contractor will bear the cost for any other type of disposal.

2 In reality, comments will not be provided for this fictitious project. USACE will evaluate the provided draft SAP as one piece of the responses to the MATOC RFP.

The Contractor shall deliver or ship sediment samples to laboratory facilities for conventionals, grain size, standard COCs, dioxins/furans and bioassays. The Contractor will be responsible for initiating chain-of-custody documentation.

All mobilization/demobilization, transportation, lodging and per-diem costs must be included in the pricing for this task.

The Contractor is responsible for coordinating with the Port of Olympia and others users of the Olympia Harbor to avoid any delays associated with vessel traffic or berth use.

Hazards and delays may arise from adverse weather conditions during sediment sampling.

Each bidder shall anticipate and account for costs associated with potential weather delays before submitting their bid. Complete weather records and reports may be obtained from any National Weather Service Office (NOAA).

4.2.3. Task 3. Analysis of Sediment Conventionals, Standard DMMP COCs, TBT, and Dioxins/Furans The DMMU composite samples will be analyzed for sediment conventionals, grain size, standard COCs, TBT and dioxins/furans in accordance with the approved SAP.

The base price for this task covers analyses for 6 samples. Please use this number of analyses for the purpose of the Factor D cost estimate. This quantity does NOT reflect the expected number of DMMU composites actually required for complete characterization of the project. Analysis of DMMU composites beyond the first 6 (as determined during the SAP preparation by the Contractor in Task 1) is not covered under the Factor D cost estimate.

Quality Assurance Requirements

Chemistry QA must include elements described in the DMMP User Manual, which includes the following (in addition to other standard laboratory QA):

• COC reporting limits must be at or lower than the DMMP Screening Levels (SLs).

• Laboratory duplicates (frequency of analysis = 1 for every 20 samples or 1 per batch, whichever is more frequent) for standard DMMP chemicals of concern and dioxins/furans.

• Laboratory triplicates (frequency of analysis = 1 for every 20 samples or 1 per batch, whichever is more frequent) for all sediment conventionals.

• Sediment reference material (e.g., certified or standard reference material; frequency of analysis = 1 for every 20 samples or 1 per batch, whichever is more frequent) for semivolatiles, pesticides/PCBs, metals, dioxins/furans and total organic carbon. The DMMP Puget Sound Sediment Reference Material will be used for PCBs and dioxins/furans.

Enough sediment must be collected from appropriate DMMUs to provide sufficient material for the required laboratory replicates. The lab replicates for each analysis type are to be conducted on sample aliquots from the same sample jar. The intent of the replicates is to get a measurement of analytical variability, not field or sampling variability.

All possible means, including additional cleanup steps, re-extraction, the use of SIM, etc.

shall be taken to ensure that reporting limits are at or below the DMMP screening levels (SLs). This is especially true for DMMUs that have no detected exceedances of SL. If it is not possible to bring RLs below the SLs, the raw data should be carefully reviewed to see whether non-detects can be reported at the method detection limit. Detected analytes at concentrations between the method detection limit and reporting limit should be J-flagged as estimated values. Method detection limits and reporting limits shall be reported for all non-detects.

The acceptance levels for the Puget Sound Sediment Reference Material (PS-SRM) can be found at: http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Dredging/SRM.aspx These acceptance levels will be used in the validation of the PCB and/or dioxin/furan data.

A request for the PS-SRM must be submitted to the CTR at least a week in advance, with the desired delivery date provided on the request form. The Contractor is responsible for paying for shipping of the PS-SRM to the lab.

For sediment reference materials other than the PS-SRM, the Contractor shall coordinate with the analytical subcontractor to establish acceptance criteria (e.g., based on the 95% confidence interval) for each chemical. The acceptance criteria and their technical rationale will be provided in the SAP. The Contractor will notify the CTR immediately in the event that the acceptance criteria are not met. Failure to meet the acceptance criteria or pass independent data validation may be the basis for re-extraction, additional cleanup, reanalysis, or resampling at the Contractor’s expense. Data rejected by the data validator or Corps of Engineers may require re-extraction, additional cleanup, reanalysis, or resampling at the Contractor’s expense.

The Contractor shall notify the CTR by telephone or email of all analytical and QC results as they are received. Preliminary analytical data (as a summary table) will be provided to the CTR within 24 hours of receipt by the Contractor, with exceedances of DMMP screening levels, bioaccumulation triggers and maximum levels highlighted. Any QC results that require data qualifiers to be applied (other than ‘U’ for non-detects) shall be described at the time the preliminary data are submitted. Missing data or data not yet submitted by the lab shall be identified as such.

Dioxin analysis Sediment samples shall be analyzed using EPA method 1613B for 2,3,7,8-substituted chlorinated dioxins and furans. The laboratory is to report each of these compounds as well as the summation of each homolog group. In addition, in order to know if interferences are occurring in this analysis, the laboratory and data reviewers shall review the chromatograms to ensure that there is no carryover from higher concentration samples and no false positives due to chemicals such as chlorinated diphenyl ethers.

The laboratory shall perform all method-required QC. In addition, the PS-SRM shall be run with each batch of sediment samples for the project. The target reporting limits for the project, as well as other quality assurance details, shall be as described in the SAP. The Contractor or analytical lab will need to submit a request for the PS-SRM and pay for shipping. The request must be submitted to the CTR at least 7 days before the desired shipping date.

Dioxin analysis and reporting must follow the guidelines in the most recent DMMP User Manual (Section 8.3.5 in the 2018 User Manual).

http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Dredging/SRM.aspx

Pricing3 Pricing is to be based on a 30-day turnaround time by the chemistry labs and must include comprehensive electronic data deliverables sufficient to conduct Stage 4 data validation.

4.2.4. Task 4. Data Validation

All sediment conventional and chemistry data generated during this investigation will undergo third-party data validation using the most recent guidelines from EPA. Data validation stages are defined by EPA (2009). A minimum of Stage 2b data validation is required for all chemical data. A minimum of 10% of dioxin data must receive an additional Stage 4 data validation.

The Contractor will notify the CTR within 24 hours in the event that deviations from the data quality objectives are found by the validator. The validation report/s shall be provided electronically to the Corps for review as an appendix to the draft data report (Task 5). The final validation report/s shall be appended to the final data report. The validation report shall include a complete listing of data qualifiers assigned by the validator along with the justification for these assignations.

4.2.5. Task 5. Data Report

A draft data report shall be prepared by the Contractor providing details from the dredged material characterization. The report shall contain (but not be limited to):

a. Summary of sampling, compositing, chemical and biological testing, QA/QC procedures and any deviations from the approved sampling and analysis plan.

b. Table(s) with sampling station coordinates (both latitude/longitude in DD with six decimal places, and State Plane South coordinates), measured water depth at each location (decimal feet), tidal stage at the time of sampling each station (decimal feet), mudline elevations (referenced to MLLW), penetration (decimal feet), recovery (decimal feet), recovery percentage, and date collected.

c. Figures showing target and actual sampling locations, with DMMU outlines.

d. Table with sample compositing scheme.

e. Table cross-referencing laboratory sample IDs with DMMU IDs (if necessary) and indicating the analyses done for each DMMU.

f. Table(s) with analytical results for chemical and conventional testing compared to the DMMP guidelines with both laboratory and validator qualifiers provided.

Exceedances of SLs, BTs and MLs are to be highlighted. Grain-size data is to be provided in the following categories: gravel, sand, silt, clay, fines (as defined in the DMMP User Manual). Both total and constituent concentrations are to be provided for LPAH, HPAH, benzofluoranthenes, DDX, chlordane and PCB Aroclors.

g. Dioxin results. Table(s) with analytical results for 2,3,7,8-substituted dioxin/furan congeners with both laboratory and validation qualifiers provided. The table(s) shall also provide the toxicity equivalency factor (TEF) for each congener and the

3 The number of samples to be used in the pricing for Task 3 shall be determined during the preparation of the example SAP in Task 1.

G3ECEHRW

Cross-Out toxicity equivalent concentration (TEC) for each sample/congener. Total toxicity equivalence (TEQ) shall be provided for each sample, both with U = 0 and U = ½ EDL. EMPCs shall be identified in the laboratory qualifiers and converted to non-detects (U) in the validation qualifiers. TEQs will be calculated using the validation qualifiers.

h. A summary of QC data for chemical and conventional testing, including validation results.

i. Table comparing PS-SRM results to acceptance ranges for PCBs and dioxins.

j. Biological testing results, including a summary of bioassay water quality data;

positive control data and comparison of controls and references to their performance standards; and interpretation of bioassay data, including appropriate statistical analyses.

k. Appendices to include the final SAP; daily sampling/processing reports; field notes; sample logs and photographs; chain-of-custody forms; comprehensive laboratory data package (electronic only); bioassay data/reports; and data validation reports. The lab report is to include a case narrative from the laboratory.

l. Shapefiles or a geodatabase with DMMU boundaries, target sampling locations and actual sampling locations; with associated tabular data as described in Task 1.

Following DMMP review of the draft data report, the CTR will provide written comments from the DMMP agencies to the Contractor. The Contractor shall incorporate all review comments into the final data report and submit the report in accordance with the schedule.

Electronic submittals will include files in their native format (e.g. Word and Excel), as well as PDF versions of the report text, tables and figures. The final electronic submittal will include the full laboratory packages, validation report, field notes, sample logs, photographs and any other information or data associated with the project.

The procedures and results from all exercised options will also need to be included in the report. However, for the purpose of pricing this task, the Contractor shall only include reporting associated with the required tasks. Incremental reporting costs associated with option tasks are to be included in the pricing for those options.

4.2.6. Task 6. EIM Data Entry

The contractor shall prepare location and results files in Microsoft Excel (.xlsx) format for submittal to the Department of Ecology’s Environmental Information Management (EIM) database in accordance with guidance provided by USACE. Comments on the draft files will be provided by the CTR. The contractor shall respond to comments provided by USACE and submit final files to the CTR ready for submittal to EIM.

5. APPLICABLE PUBLICATIONS PERTAINING TO THIS PWS

DMMP, 2010a. Polychlorinated Dioxins and Furans (PCDD/F): Revisions to the

Supplemental Quality Assurance Project Plan, Dredged Material Management Program, November 2010.

DMMP, 2010b. Revised Supplemental Information on Polychlorinated Dioxins and Furans (PCDD/F) for Use in Preparing a Quality Assurance Project Plan, Dredged Material Management Program, November 2010.

EPA, 2009. Guidance for Labeling Externally Validated Laboratory Analytical Data for Superfund Use. EPA 540-R-08-005. January.

DMMP, 2000. Determination of the Suitability of Dredged Material Tested under DMMP Evaluation Procedures for the Olympia Harbor Navigation Project for Disposal at the Anderson/Ketron Open Water Disposal Site, Prepared by Seattle District for the DMMP Agencies, May 17, 2000.

DMMP, 2005. Suitability Determination Recency Extension for Proposed Maintenance Dredge Material at Olympia Harbor, Lower Budd Inlet, Olympia, Washington (Public Notice #23) Evaluated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for Open-Water Disposal at an Approved PSDDA (Anderson Island) Site. Prepared by Seattle District for the DMMP Agencies, May 24, 2005.

DMMP, 2006. Supplemental Determination on the Suitability of Dredged Material Tested for Dioxin/Furans within the Olympia Harbor Federal/Port Navigation Project Evaluated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for Open-Water Disposal at the Anderson/Ketron Island Non-dispersive Disposal Site, and for Beneficial Use. Prepared by Seattle District for the DMMP Agencies, September 14, 2006.

DMMP, 2014. Applicability of Previous Testing Data within the Shoaled Areas of the Olympia Harbor Federal Navigation Channel and Need for Further Testing. Prepared by Seattle District for the DMMP Agencies, March 19, 2014.

DMMP, 2016. Dredged Material Evaluation and Disposal Procedures (User Manual), August 2016.

Puget Sound Estuary Program Protocols and Guidelines, various dates.

Factor D: Bid Schedule

Please use the table below to complete Factor D.

BID SCHEDULE

line item task description unit bid amount

B as e It em s

0001 SAP Preparation Job

0002 Dredged Material Sampling/Processing (24 cores) Job

0003 Chemical and Conventional Analysis (includes dioxins & TBT) for 6 samples Job

Data Validation for samples in Task 3 Job

Data Report Job

EIM data entry Job

Total Base Items:

Total Bid Price