Amendment_5-Revised.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)

30-105-04 EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Answer questions, update solicitation accordingly, extend proposal due date to 8 March 2016.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1 128

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15C. DATE SIGNED 15B. 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 W912P4-15-R-0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Dec-2015

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 X is extended, 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

10-Feb-2016

CODE

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

USACE, BUFFALO

1776 NIAGARA STREET

BUFFALO NY 14207-3199

W912P4 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODE CODE

EMAIL: TEL:

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:

ROUND 6 QUESTIONS AND ANSWER

1. In reference to the requirements for Section C, paragraph 5.1.2.5 (Nuclear Criticality Safety

(NCS) Program), does the Government require a complete NCS Program with all implementing procedures, and Nuclear Criticality Safety Assessments/Evaluations and Calculations (NCSAs) or only a high-level NCS Program document?

Answer: USACE requires a complete NCS Program as described in Section C, §5.1.2.5.

2. Section C, paragraph 3.2, states that the “Physical security of the site is the responsibility of

USACE and its contracted security force”; however, it is not clear what support the Offeror is required to provide.

a. Are we required to perform a Site Physical Security Threat Assessment and construct/maintain the physical security infrastructure required for a Nuclear Category I or II Facility?

b. What Physical Security infrastructure, if any, is the contractor responsible for providing to the Government-contracted security force?

Answer:

a. The Site Physical Security Plan and any security assessments will be developed/revised by

USACE in coordination with the CONTRACTOR. The CONTRACTOR will be responsible for constructing/maintaining any site security infrastructure that is required to adequately protect the site determined by the Category level the CONTRACTOR proposes for operations

(e.g., vault type room for Category I). USACE fully anticipates that the current site PSP will need to be revised to work in coordination with the selected CONTRACTOR’S approach to remediation.

b. Additional security infrastructure needs cannot be determined until the CONTRACTOR’S approach is developed. At this time, the only piece of equipment that the CONTRACTOR will need to provide to security is two-way radios.

3. Section C, paragraph 3.2, references the requirement for the offeror to comply with the following information security requirements: “The CONTRACTOR and all subcontractors will be required to have personnel with the appropriate security clearances, and will be required to protect classified information pursuant to relevant policies. Security requirements will be administered in accordance with 10 CFR Part 73, DOD Manual 5220.22M, National Industrial Security Program

Operating Manual, DOD Regulation 5200.01R, DOD Information Security Program, and Army

Regulation (AR) 190-13, The Army Physical Security Program.” Based on this statement, are we required to operate/manage the information security program and procure secure communications, storage facilities, and physical protection requirements; or will the USACE manage the information security program including the security classifier, communication/storage systems, and all associated information security requirements for the contractors input and utilization?

Answer: USACE will manage the information security program, however there is potential that the CONTRACTOR would need to acquire assets or add site infrastructure to support the program.

4. Regarding Amendment 2, Q&A response 33, are we to assume Trench 99 is first remediation task order executed under a new IDIQ contract, and that ALL site mobilization, setup, and infrastructure requirements must be priced in accordance with PWS WBS elements Mobilization of Construction Equipment and Facilities – 331XX0101 and On-Site Laboratory Facilities –

331XX0213? Since Sample Project #1 is of limited quantity, scope, and durations, complete site set-up in anticipation of follow-on remediation activity may not be warranted. Thus, the USACE response to require ONLY the “Costs associated with installation of necessary infrastructure and support facilities should be included in the bid schedule” could allow an Offeror to propose a limited site set-up with no anticipation for follow-on task orders or remedial activities.

Answer: Costs associated with installation of necessary infrastructure and support facilities related to the Offeror’s conceptual approach should be included in the bid schedule to support remediation of the entire site. Offeror’s should NOT propose a limited site set-up as follow-on task orders are anticipated.

5. In reference to Sample Project #1, WBS 331XX0790 (Material Processing Building Air Handler

Carbon Change-outs), should the contractors assume a complete carbon media change-out is required? If so, how much and what type of carbon media does the system require?

Answer: Offeror’s should assume that existing carbon media is suitable for processing Trench

99 of Sample Project #1, without needing to be replaced. The Operation & Maintenance Manual as well as the Standard Operation Procedures for the MPB air handling system have been added as Attachments 8.1 and 8.2, respectively.

6. For the waste quantities and classifications in the Sample Project #1, can we apply waste minimization approaches or innovative technologies to change the waste quantities and/or classifications?

Answer: No. Offerors may describe potential waste minimization approaches or innovative technologies in their conceptual approach requested in Section L, Volume 1. However, for the purposes of cost proposals, Offerors may not alter the waste quantities and classifications in the bid schedule for Sample Project #1 (Attachment 7.4).

7. Section M, paragraph 3.5 states, “The probable cost will be determined by adjusting each

Offeror’s proposed cost, and fee when appropriate, to reflect any additions or reductions in cost elements to realistic levels based on the results of the cost realism analysis.” Please explain how the USACE will “adjust” the Offeror’s proposed cost based on differing Offerors assumptions

(e.g., drastically differing waste volumes and classifications) and technical approaches.

Answer: Section M, §3.5 was revised to state: “Cost analysis and cost realism analysis will be performed on the Sample Task Order in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(c) and (d), respectively.”

Please also see response to question 6 above.

8. Volume 5, Section 3.5.1 of the RFP states that “The Offeror must also include a breakout of the details of the costs provided by all major subcontractors – defined as members of an Offeror’s team who are expected to perform ten percent or more of the proposed effort for any subcontracted supplies, materials, equipment, and travel costs, as described above. The Offeror should provide sufficient information for the evaluators to determine the adequacy and value of the cost data, whether the costs are realistic for work to be performed, whether the costs demonstrate that the Offeror understands the requirements, and whether the costs are consistent with the technically proposed method used in the Sample Project.”

Please confirm that USACE does not require direct or indirect cost backup supporting subcontracted cost estimates for subcontractors with less than 10% of the proposed work value.

Answer: A “breakout of the details” is required for all major subcontractors “who are expected to perform ten percent or more…” However, sufficient “details” must be provided as specified

(e.g. paragraph 3.5.1.2 Subcontracts) such that a determination may be made as to the reasonableness of the proposal.

9. The 15 years experience required in the resumes makes it very difficult to cover required items in less than 2 pages; however, with only 55 pages total for the entire Organizational Approach and

Management Plan, if we do 2-page resumes (38 pages total for the 19 positions) this only leaves

17 pages for all other items including the Corporate Quality Assurance Program, which is not adequate to cover all requested information. Firms are left with a difficult decision of reducing many of the resumes to one page or not adequately addressing all other required items. This will likely lead to varying approaches and may make it difficult to compare offeror proposals. Would

USACE please consider providing an additional 10 pages or exclude the resumes from the page count while reducing the overall page count?

Answer: Refer to answer for Question 2 of Amendment 2.

10. Please confirm if we are to assume that the 1 April 2017 NTP date is the date we are allowed to:

(1) Start work plans, or

(2) We are to assume work plans have already been completed and this is the date we are allowed to mobilize to the site and to start site infrastructure work, or

(3) We are to assume site infrastructure work has been completed and this is the date we are allowed to begin trench remediation

Answer: Upon NTP, the CONTRACTOR will commence work on Task Order 001 for Work

Plan development.

11. Since the work plans are priced in Sample Task #1, please confirm that we do not include this costs in Sample Project #1; other than modifications/updates that might be needed specific to the trench being remediated.

Answer: As noted in Attachment 7.3, Sample Project #1 PWS, Section 3.0, the CONTRACTOR must prepare a cost estimate for all tasks described in this sample project PWS, except for development of remediation work plans (331XX0103 Submittals / Implementation Plans).

12. USACE has indicated that site infrastructure costs need to be included in Sample Project #1.

Please confirm that we are to assume that no infrastructure work, beyond that currently existing at the site, has started prior to NTP (1 April 2017) for Sample Project #1 and that all site infrastructure required for remediation of the trench should be priced in Sample Project #1.

Answer: Confirmed. See also answer to question 4 above.

13. Based on the number of questions that have been asked and the impact answers will likely have in terms of changes to the final proposal, we respectfully request a 2-week extension to the February

17 due date.

Answer: The solicitation schedule is updated as follows:

19 February 2016 – Final day to submit requests for clarification for questions and answers provided to date. Questions or requests shall cite specific solicitation amendment number and question and answer number.

8 March 2016 – Updated proposal due date.

14. We understand that sealed (hard top) intermodals have been used previously for waste T&D.

Would USACE confirm if the costs for Sample Project #1 is to be based on sealed/hard top intermodals or if this decision is left to the contractor.

Answer: This decision is left up to the CONTRACTOR.

15. The bid schedule for Sample Project #1 shows a 24 month duration for several items. Please confirm if contractors should bid to this duration or the duration we determine based on our schedule.

Answer: The duration of WBS elements 331XX22, 331XX1920, 331XX0791, 331XX0792, and

331XX0507 may be changed to be consistent with the Offeror’s proposed schedule. All other

WBS element quantities on the bid schedule must remain unchanged.

16. Are hard lid secure railcars, if acceptable to the waste disposal facility, compliant with the requirements/specifications?

Answer: Yes. See also answer to question 14 above.

17. Please provide quantities for intact drums and partially intact that may or may not contain contaminated soil and material. As we need to estimate the effort and material cost required for opening the drums under inert atmosphere, sampling & analyzing the content?

Answer: Sample Project #1 is meant to elicit the Offeror’s technical experience, methods, and innovation in the face of unknown trench contents. Waste records that estimate the volume of waste in the SLDA trenches, as well as the radiological and chemical contaminants and SNM mass, are not considered to be accurate and the actual contents of the trenches are unknown. The

Corps of Engineers considers the excavation of the decades-old buried wastes to be a process of discovery, wherein we apply a risk-based approach to in-situ identification, excavation, removal, and disposal of materials consistent with best engineering and health physics practices.

18. Please provide the quantity of samples to be assumed to perform multi-media radiological and chemical sampling & analysis for wide variety of compounds? Please provide the compound list for analysis?

Answer: See answer to Question 17 above.

19. Please provide the quantity for the number of soil and rock boring to be performed along with the depth of the borings?

20. How many groundwater monitoring wells needs to be decommissioned and how many new wells are to be installed with maximum depth requirements for cost estimation purposes?

21. Do we consider site wide monitoring for fixed system and portable monitoring for around work area. Do we need continuous real time beryllium monitoring for portable system with online alarm and messaging for immediate response and early detection?

Answer: Offeror’s should propose the best approach to meet or exceed the health and safety requirements to ensure protection of workers and the public.

22. Provide assumed quantities of wastewater to be treated, sampled and discharged during remediation of the disposal trench 99?

23. Do we consider the cost to build the treatment plant as part of infrastructure requirement for this estimate or in the site wide Fixed Price estimate?

Answer: Offerors should include the costs to build any proposed infrastructure for Sample

Project #1.

24. Please provide the current utility layout drawings for the site?

Answer: USACE does not have as-built drawings for utilities at the site. Locating site utilities will be the responsibility of the CONTRACTOR.

25. Please provide all relevant equipment electrical loads in order to properly size a “suitably sized emergency back-up generator for the MPB.

Answer: Sizing the emergency back-up generator for the site will be the responsibility of the

CONTRACTOR based upon their approach.

26. Please confirm that only one carbon change out is to be priced and clarify if reactivated carbon is allowable.

Answer: See answer to Question 5 above.

27. Please provide the MPB air pollution control systems O&M Plan to allow contractors to scope all routine and non-routine maintenance.

28. Please clarify the composition of the excavated material (i.e. density of soil, moisture content, maximum size and composition of debris, number and size of containers anticipated in the trench, etc.).

29. Please provide additional information on the underground mines (i.e. layout beneath and around the trench, depth below trench and surrounding area, etc.).

Answer: Offerors should use the information provided in the Remedial Investigation and

Feasibility Study reports regarding the underground mines.

30. Please expand on the bid item for 12 months of container handling. Please provide details on any requirements to perform routine moving of containers for this 12 month period. Should this line item be a lump sum instead?

Answer: See answer to Question 15 above.

31. Based on the dimensions provided, please also confirm if the contractor is to include the excavation and handling of additional slope-back material.

Answer: Confirmed. All material exhumed in the removal of trench waste materials must be characterized and dispositioned appropriately by the CONTRACTOR. For the purposes of

Sample Project #1, Offerors should assume a total volume for cover soils and cutback soils of

8,000 BCY. Attachment 7.3, Sample Project #1 PWS, Section 1.1 has been revised to include this information.

32. Please clarify how and for what positions the SCA wage determination is applicable. There are similar labor categories in both the DBA and SCA wage determinations and significant differences in the rates.

Answer: Service Contract Act wages rates apply to this solicitation. The DBA is provided for occupational codes not listed in the SCA wage determinations.

33. Please clarify the days and hours the work site will be available to the contractor? Will the contractor be allowed to work weekends or 2nd shift?

Answer: For the purposes of Sample Project #1, Offerors should assume a 40-hour work week, Monday through Friday. Offerors may propose alternative work schedules in their conceptual approach and explain anticipated schedule benefits.

34. In the solicitation referenced documents, reference is made to “3000 tons of Material being shipped by Cabrera” during the last project campaign. Can the USACE please identify the classification of, transportation mode, and disposal site where the material was shipped.

Answer: The Corps of Engineers disposed of low level radioactive waste from the remediation of SLDA using sealed intermodal containers (IMCs). The IMCs were closed on-site at SLDA and loaded onto trucks for off-site transport to ALARON in Wampum, PA, and trans-loaded onto flat bed rail cars for transport to Energy Solutions, Utah facility for disposal.

35. In the solicitation (sec. 2.3) and the RI there is no reference (RPOC’s) to any sampling uncovering U-233 on the site in soils, trenches or test wells. Should the contractor consider U-

233 as potentially discoverable?

Answer: Yes. See also answer to Question 17 above.

36. During the Site walk down on the 20th Jan, it was stated that “The Air handling units in the

Materials processing Building were operational and ready. During the previous walk down Jan 9, 2013, It was stated that “the air handling units would require major maintenance prior to possible start up and usage” What is the condition of the air handling units and will they be assumed to be fully operational when the contractor begins operations on the site?

Answer: The air handling units are operated on a regular basis as part of the ongoing maintenance contract, and will be operational and ready for the new remediation contractor.

37. Sample Project Trench 99: Section 1.1 of the sample project describes the types of low-level and mixed low-level wastes to be assumed, but does not provide radionuclide types and/or concentration levels or potential chemical constituents for the bidder to consider in determining waste classification, waste package selection or disposal site acceptance-selection. With a wide set of assumptions ranging from the very low end of the classification spectrum to the very high, responses and thereby costs proposed could vary substantially. What assumed Radionuclide and concentration levels as well as chemical constituents should be assumed for the sample problem?

38. Sample Problem ATT_ 7.4_Bid_Schedule_ worksheet list the following:

331XX0202 Radiation Monitoring

331XX0203 Air Monitoring and Sampling

331XX0205 Sampling Surface Water / Groundwater / Liquid Waste

331XX0206 Sampling Soil and Sediment

331XX0208 Sampling Radioactive Contaminated Media

331XX0209 Laboratory Chemical Analysis

331XX0210 Radioactive Waste Analysis

331XX0211 Geotechnical Testing

331XX0213 On-Site Laboratory Facilities

331XX0290 Beryllium Monitoring, Sampling, Testing, and Analysis

Each ask for a unit and a Bid Price. Is the bidder to assume the support associated with all of the above is dictated by the parameters of the Bidders assumed frequencies and performance period of the schedule of the Sample Project #1?

Answer: Yes.

39. Sample Problem ATT_ 7.4_Bid_Schedule_ worksheet. What is the assumed frequency for the

331XX0790 Material Processing Building Air Handler Carbon Change-outs, from past contractor experience? What is the Volume and type of Carbon to be used?

40. Sample Problem ATT_ 7.4_Bid_Schedule_ worksheet list the following:

331XX1921 Transportation to Storage / Disposal Facility

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Soil tons 6000

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Debris tons 1500

Low-Level Radioactive Mixed Waste tons 750

331XX1922 Disposal Fees and Taxes

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Soil tons 6000

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Debris tons 1500

Low-Level Radioactive Mixed Waste tons 750

As shown in this table there is no information on what radionuclides and concentrations should be assumed, driving characterization, packaging and disposal site selections. There is also no information on the types of low-level mixed wastes. Should the bidder assume the lowest levels of radioactive materials, the handling, packaging and T&D will be very different than with higher concentration assumptions. What radionuclide concentrations should be considered by the bidders? What radionuclides, concentrations, types, and physical form of chemical constituents should be assumed for the mixed waste? What density should be assumed for CY/Ton?

Answer: See answer to Question 17 above, and see also answer to Question 6 of Amendment 3.

41. For development of Sample Problem #1, can it be assumed that a security plan has been modified to allow all categories of Special Nuclear Material to be handled and stored (pending transfer to appropriate destinations) since the existing plan is not available for public viewing?

Answer: Yes. Offeror’s should assume that the PSP will be modified during work plan development in Task Order 001. See also answer to Question 4 of Amendment 2.

42. Has heavy equipment transited the existing trenches in the past, such that it can be safely assumed that the presence of that type of equipment will not adversely impact underground containers

(e.g., deteriorating drums with potential SNM and void spaces)?

Answer: Heavy equipment did not transit the existing trenches during the previous USACE efforts. USACE has no knowledge of heavy equipment transiting the trenches prior to our involvement.

43. Is it USACE’s preference that all key management personnel be available to work on-site for at-least the start up of the project to avoid the issue that of not having adequate personnel available to deal with issues as they arise?

Answer: USACE has revised the SOW, Section C, §6.1(c) to clarify the personnel that must be on site as follows: “(c) Key personnel identified in paragraph (b) above must be on-site full time during remediation task order execution with the exception of the Program Manager.”

44. The site visit revealed the presence of a Category 2 storage facility in the Main Process Building

– does that mean that the site can possess up to Category 2 material per 10CFR73?

Answer: The site does not have any statutory/legal/permitted possession limits. The amount of material the site is able to possess is dependent upon the CONTRACTOR’S remediation approach. However, possessing higher Categories requires the site to meet additional regulatory requirements. USACE emphasizes that as stated in Section M, §3.1.1, the description of a remediation approach that minimizes site down time due to unforeseen hazards, incomplete preparation, or adverse weather, while maintaining the required safety basis, may be evaluated more favorably.

45. An independent investigation documented by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) dated

March 6, 2014 indicated that the documents used as the basis for the current FUSRAP remediation effort grossly underestimated the material buried there – is it anticipated that a

Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS), which had previously been determined to be unnecessary, will be required? If so, should that system be considered in the costing of Sample

Project #1?

Answer: USACE anticipates that one or more CAAS will be necessary. However, Offerors must provide a conceptual approach and pricing in the proposal for justifying the inclusion or omission of some or all CAAS. See also answer to Question 17 above.

46. An independent investigation documented by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) dated

March 6, 2014 indicated that the NRC project manager said based on the designation of certain information related to the SLDA project as classified, security clearances with respect to the contractors and subcontractors could impact overall site operations. If so, will it be required that bidders not be operating under Foreign Ownership, Control or Influence (FOCI)?

Answer: The requirement is for the CONTRACTOR to be able to obtain a FCL and have cleared personnel who are authorized to view classified information up to the Secret level. The

CONTRACTOR must not be under FOCI to such a degree that granting of a FCL would be inconsistent with national security interests. Questions in regards to FOCI and the

CONTRACTOR’S situation can be answered by the Defense Security Service.

http://www.dss.mil/isp/foci/foci_info.html and http://www.dss.mil/isp/foci/foci_contacts.html

47. For Sample Problem #1 it is stated that “during pre-excavation surveys, an area of extremely high count rate (>1 million gross counts per minute) was identified using a 2-inch by 2-inch (2x2) sodium iodide (NaI) detector. Was it assumed that there were window(s) on the detector to limit the radiation detected to gamma/x-rays, or was the detector surface unshielded such that all potentially emitted radiation (including alpha and low energy beta) was detected?

http://www.dss.mil/isp/foci/foci_info.html http://www.dss.mil/isp/foci/foci_contacts.html

Answer: The detector is assumed to be used as it would normally arrive from the manufacturer without a specific window (the buyer did not request a specific window) and does not detect alpha and low energy beta radiations. A detector that has been used in the field at many FUSRAP should be assumed, i.e., a Ludlum Model 44-10 (50 keV-3.0 MeV 2 in. dia x 2 in. thick NaI(Tl)).

48. The RFP discusses security clearances with regard to protecting classified material, however there is also a security consideration for clearances with regard to the possession of certain amounts of special nuclear material. The RFP also states “Anecdotal information suggests that not all materials buried at SLDA were recorded or documented, and burials may have continued beyond 1970.” Should it be assumed that there is a potential for a larger portion of the employee and contractor population to require clearances for this reason and should that cost be included into the costing of Sample Project 1?

Answer: It depends on the Offeror’s conceptual approach. See also answers to Questions 17 and

44 above.

49. The RFP, ROD and supplemental documents provided to contractors indicate the potential for 3 isotopes of SNM, U-235, U-233, and Pu-239. Does the USACE require that contractors perform in-situ characterization of all three isotopes prior to exhumation of waste, or just U-235.

Answer: See answers to Questions 17 and 35 above.

50. Will the USACE allow contractors to make assumptions about the relationship between radiological contaminates and hazardous contaminates, such as Beryllium? Or should the contractor assume there is no statistically significant relationship between radiological and hazardous materials?

Answer: See also answer to Question 17 above.

51. The RFP, ROD, and supplemental documents provided indicate the potential for total SNM quantities to exceed the allowances for category 2 facility. Does the USACE require that contractors plan to upgrade the facility to Category 1 or is it the goal of the USACE to keep the facility at CAT2? Does the USACE require that contractors include the cost to upgrade to category 1 facility in the sample project #1 cost estimate?

Answer: See answer to Questions 17 and 44 above. USACE requires that Offerors include all costs associated with their proposed conceptual approach.

52. The site has no license and some of the waste may only contain small concentrations of Uranium-

238 and Th-232 which can be disposed of at unlicensed waste facilities. Does the USACE require that contractors ship waste to only licensed radiological waste facilities?

Answer: The Offeror’s first statement regarding the site license is factually incorrect. SLDA is currently owned by BWXT Government Group, Inc. (BWXT) and is maintained under United

States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license SNM-2001. The NRC issued a confirmatory order suspending the license on August 5, 2011, to enable the Corps of Engineers to accomplish the cleanup, and the license will be reinstated in accordance with Article III.N of the

2001 MOU upon completion of the project. See also answer to Question 28 of Amendment 4.

53. Regarding work plans, can the contractor assume that certain mobilization activities can occur prior to all of the plans being approved. For example, can mobilization and site activities that are non-intrusive occur before all plans are approved by the USACE.

Answer: For the purposes of this proposal, Offerors should assume that all work plans must be accepted by USACE prior to mobilization activities.

54. Sample Task Order 1, SECTION J, Attachment 7.1, Shallow Land Disposal Area Task Order

001, Develop Remediation Work Plans and Performance Work Statement under 2.3 Workplans -

Item (b) states “If stakeholder comments are significant, USACE will request additional revisions to the plans with errata sheets, as necessary.” It is unclear how “significant” should be interpreted.

We respectfully request that USACE clearly define what “significant” means as it relates to type of comment and the quantity of comments. If comments are deemed “non-significant” should the contractor assume no further work plan revisions are required and the current final version will be acceptable for the regulators and meets the contract specifications.

Answer: References to “significant” comments have been removed from Attachment 7.1, Task

Order 001 PWS. In addition, Attachment 7.1, Task Order 001 PWS, Section 2.2 and Enclosure 1, have been revised to more clearly explain the document review cycles and submittal requirements.

55. SECTION J, Attachment 7.3, Shallow Land Disposal Area, Sample Project # 1, Remediation of

Disposal Trench 99 Performance Work Statement – USACE’s assumptions and guidance provide no details or clear basis to determine the frequency of occurrence of locating underground anomalies. The vagueness of the assumptions will allow for wide swings by the bidders on what is found and where in trench 99 these discrete objects, fissile materials, and/or debris fields are located, at what depths and the quantities of each. The contractor requests USACE provide specific details on the deposition of unknown subsurface anomalies, frequency of occurrence, types-volumes and depth location of :

1. intact/closed containers that may or may not contain waste;

2. partially intact containers potentially containing waste;

3. solid materials, such as typical contaminated waste, b

4. Building demolition debris, etc. (including solid materials that may pose a shielding issue);

5. discrete items.

6. trench materials may contain fissile material, other non-SNM radiological (fission and activation products, transuranics, Ra, etc.) and non-radiological material, including beryllium

56. SECTION J, Attachment 7.3, Shallow Land Disposal Area, Sample Project # 1, Remediation of

Disposal Trench 99 Performance Work Statement – states “Assume hazards may result from the underground mines beneath the trench area.” We request USACE provide the details and specifics regarding the hazards and impacts related to trench 99 remediation as to mitigate large assumption swings by the bidders. Standardizing the unknown’s for this assumption will reduce the risk for the contractors and provide USACE with realistic cost due to the impact of the hazards as defined by USACE.”

Answer: See answer to Question 3 of Amendment 3.

57. What is the intent of having 331XX01 mobilization and preparation work in the bid schedule for

Sample Task #1? Do we need to include any mob and site preparation costs outside preparation and approval of the project submittals (planning documents)?

Answer: If this question is referring to the bid schedule for Task Order 001, Submittals

(331XX0103) are a sub-WBS item to Mobilization and Preparatory Work. If this question is referring to the bid schedule for Sample Project #1, Mobilization and Preparatory Work will be necessary.

58. How much import fill needs to be brought in to perform the earth work in addition to reusing some of the excavated material.

Answer: Offerors should assume a total of 10,400 LCY of off-site fill is required. Attachment

7.3, Sample Project #1 PWS has been revised to include this information.

59. Regarding the Sample Project #1 bid schedule, if the total quantity of material to be excavated is

5,500 bank cubic yards as listed under 331XX0801 line item, How much of this quantity is considered as off-site disposal in terms of 6000-, 1500- and 750-tons provided as line items

331XX1921 and 1922 in the bid schedule

Answer: The total quantity of material to be excavated was incorrectly stated as 5,500 BCY.

The correct amount is 13,500 BCY and Attachment 7.4, Bid Schedule Worksheet has been revised. All of the 5,500 BCY of material is considered as off-site disposal.

60. Can the groundwater depth be more defined instead of saying it will be encountered 0 to 18’ below ground surface (reference to Spec 02 61 13 Section 1.3.1)?

Answer: The reference to groundwater depth has been removed from Section 02 61 13. See also answer to Question 3 of Amendment 3.

61. The list of planning documents provided under Attachment 7.1 001 is different from the ones listed in Spec Attachment 11.9 UFGS 02_61_13. Please confirm that Attachment 7.1 001 is the correct version?

Answer: The list of required plans has been removed from Section 02 61 13. Offeror’s should refer to Section C, 5.1.2 of the SOW and Attachment 7.1, Task Order 001 PWS for the work plan requirements.

62. Reference: Cost evaluation

Question: How will the programmatic costs associated with the overall security program be evaluated by the USACE? For example, one bidder could assume that an unlimited security force would be available (provided by USACE), while another bidder may elect to price engineered systems to minimize the insider threat potential.

Answer: As stated in Section M, §3.1.1, the use of innovative technologies to address the hazards and waste materials at SLDA, including approaches that propose positive impacts to the security program, may be evaluated more favorably as part of Volume 1. However, impacts to the programmatic costs associated with the security program will not evaluated as part of Volume

5, Price Factor.

63. Reference: Based on the site walk, it is our understanding that there is an existing contractor at the SLDA site performing non-security services.

Question: Has the USACE provided all information generated from this current contract in the solicitation?

Answer: No. However, USACE will provide that information to the selected Offeror.

64. Reference: Posting of final answers to contractor questions, and closing date for questions.

Question: If USACE provides final answers near or after the closing date for questions of

January 27, will sufficient opportunity be allowed to submit requests for clarification on those last answers posted?

Answer: See answer to question 13 above.

OTHER CHANGES

a) Section C, §5.1.2.10(c) change to: “The CONTRACTOR must provide a quality independent technical review (ITR) of documents and data, as negotiated in each Task Order, to be provided to the USACE prior to submittal.”

b) Section L, Volume 3, §3.3, Management Plan, list item 1 of 12 change “5.1.2.9” to “5.1.2.10”.

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

The following have been modified:

SCOPE OF WORK

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS / SPECIFICATIONS / WORK STATEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section C - Descriptions / Specifications / Work Statement

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

1.0 GENERAL

1.1 Contract Award

1.2 Issuance of Task Orders

1.3 Scope of Work

2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2.1 Site Location and Description

2.2 Site History

2.3 ROCs and Soil Cleanup Goals

2.4 Regulatory Background

2.5 Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

2.6 Roles and Responsibilities

2.7 USACE Mega-Project Requirements

2.8 Existing Site Conditions and Information

3.0 UNIVERSAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Safety and Health

3.2 Physical and Information Security

3.3 Environmental Requirements

3.4 Radiological Materials and Equipment

3.5 Laboratory Support Services

3.5.1 Field Testing Capability

3.5.2 On-site or Subcontracted Laboratory

3.5.3 Capabilities

3.5.4 Analytical Methods

3.6 Analytical Data and Other Data – Required Format

3.7 Geospatial Data Format

3.8 Typical Reports – Required Format and Frequency

4.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR COST REIMBURSEMENT TASK ORDERS

4.1 Contract Management Procedures

4.2 Cost Control

4.3 Accounting System Capabilities

4.4 Management Organization, Responsibilities, and Authorities

4.5 Mobilization

4.6 Management Information System

4.7 Work Allocation Document

4.8 Procurement and Subcontracting

4.9 Subcontractor Changes and Claims

4.10 Closeout Procedures

5.0 REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES AND REQUIREMENTS

5.1 Mobilization and Preparatory Work – 331XX01

5.1.1 Mobilization of Construction Equipment and Facilities – 331XX0101

5.1.2 Submittals / Implementation Plans – 331XX0103

5.1.2.1 Project Schedule

5.1.2.2 Site Operations Plan (SOP)

5.1.2.3 Accident Prevention Plan (APP) / Site Safety and Health Plan (SSHP) / Chronic

Beryllium Disease Prevention Program (CBDPP)

5.1.2.4 Radiation Protection Program (RPP)

5.1.2.5 Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Program

5.1.2.6 Material Control and Accounting (MC&A) Program

5.1.2.7 Emergency Plan

5.1.2.8 Physical Security Plan

5.1.2.9 Communications Plan

5.1.2.10 Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Plan

5.1.2.11 Regulatory Compliance Plan

5.1.2.12 Perimeter Air Monitoring Plan (PAMP)

5.1.2.13 Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)

5.1.2.14 Wastewater Management Plan (WMP)

5.1.2.15 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)

5.1.2.16 Waste Management, Transportation, and Disposal Plan

5.1.2.17 Waste Management Transportation and Disposal Facilities Report Package

5.1.2.18 Transportation Security Plan / Transporter Certification

5.1.2.19 Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP)

5.1.2.20 Backfill and Restoration Plan

5.1.3 Meetings

5.1.3.1 Facilitated Partnering

5.1.3.2 Coordination Meeting

5.1.3.3 Preconstruction Conference

5.1.3.4 Pre-Construction Survey

5.1.3.5 Mega Design-Construction Evaluations

5.1.4 Setup / Construct Temporary Facilities – 331XX0103

5.2 Monitoring, Sampling, Testing, and Analysis – 331XX02

5.2.1 Meteorological Monitoring – 331XX0201

5.2.2 Radiation Monitoring – 331XX0202

5.2.3 Air Monitoring and Sampling – 331XX0203

5.2.4 Sampling Surface Water / Groundwater / Liquid Waste – 331XX0205

5.2.5 Sampling Soil and Sediment – 331XX0206

5.2.6 Sampling Radioactive Contaminated Media – 331XX0208

5.2.7 Laboratory Chemical Analysis – 331XX0209

5.2.8 Radioactive Waste Analysis – 331XX0210

5.2.9 Geotechnical Testing – 331XX0211

5.2.10 On-Site Laboratory Facilities – 331XX0213

5.2.11 Beryllium Monitoring, Sampling, Testing, and Analysis – 331XX0290

5.3 Surface Water Collection and Control – 331XX05

5.4 Air Pollution / Gas Collection and Control – 331XX07

5.5 Solids Collection and Containment – 331XX08

5.6 Liquids / Sediments / Sludges Collection and Containment – 331XX09

5.7 Physical Treatment – 331XX13

5.8 Disposal (Commercial) – 331XX19

5.8.1 Transportation, Storage, Treatment and/or Disposal of Hazardous Materials

5.8.1.1 Transportation

5.8.1.2 Identification of the Disposal Facility

5.8.1.3 Shipment Tracking

5.8.1.4 Tracking of Hazardous, Radioactive, and/or Solid Wastes

5.8.1.5 Certification

5.8.2 Complete Manifest Package

5.8.2.1 Preparation

5.8.2.2 Submittal

5.8.2.3 Approval

5.8.2.4 Designation of Generator

5.8.2.5 Transportation of Waste

5.8.2.6 Generator Status

5.8.3 Transportation and Disposal Reporting Requirements

5.8.3.1 Hazardous Waste Manifest Annual and/or Biennial Reporting Requirements

5.8.3.2 Tabulated Waste Handling Information

5.8.3.3 State Reporting Requirements

5.8.3.4 Transportation and Disposal Tracking Form

5.8.3.5 Discrepancy Reports

5.8.3.6 Exception Reports

5.8.3.7 On-Site Personnel

5.8.4 Contractor Responsibilities

5.8.5 Government Responsibilities

5.8.6 Regulator Notices of Non-Compliance

5.8.7 Subcontractor Coordination

5.9 Site Restoration – 331XX20

5.10 Demobilization – 331XX21

5.10.1 Removal of Temporary Facilities – 331XX2101

5.10.2 Final Decontamination – 331XX2103

5.10.3 Demobilization of Construction Equipment and Facilities – 331XX2104

5.10.4 Submittals – 331XX2106

5.10.4.1 Project Completion Report

5.10.4.2 Lessons Learned Reports

5.10.4.3 Lessons Learned Meetings

5.11 General Requirements – 331XX22

5.11.1 Supervision and Management – 331XX2201

5.11.1.1 Project Meetings

5.11.1.2 Conference Calls / Progress Meetings

5.11.2 Administration Job Office – 331XX2202

5.11.3 Engineering, Surveying, and Quality Control – 331XX2204

5.11.4 First Aid, Fire Protection, and Traffic Control – 331XX2206

5.11.5 Health and Safety – 331XX2207

5.11.5 Temporary Construction Facilities – Ownership – 331XX2208

5.11.6 Temporary Construction Facilities – Operation – 331XX2209

5.11.7 Project Utilities – 331XX2210

6.0 CONTRACTOR PROJECT STAFF ORGANIZATION, QUALIFICATIONS AND

RESPONSIBILITIES

6.1 List of Key Job Functions, Qualifications and Responsibilities

6.1.1 Program Manager

6.1.2 Project Manager

6.1.3 Site Superintendent

6.1.4 Safety and Health Manager

6.1.5 Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO)

6.1.6 Radiation Safety Officer

6.1.7 Assistant Radiation Safety Officer

6.1.8 Certified Health Physicist (CHP)

6.1.9 Construction Quality Control System Manager

6.1.10 Nuclear Material Accountability Officer

6.1.11 Nuclear Criticality Safety Manager

6.1.12 Senior NCS Engineer

6.1.13 Data Acquisition Manager

6.1.14 Project Chemist / Lab Manager

6.1.15 Training Coordinator

6.1.16 Facility Security Officer

6.1.17 Emergency Manager

6.1.18 Waste Manager

6.1.19 Project Scheduler

6.2 Other On-Site Personnel

6.3 Corporate Support Staff

6.3.1 Civil Engineer

6.3.2 Hydro-Geologist

6.3.3 Regulatory Specialist

6.3.4 Cost Scheduler

6.3.5 Contracts Manager

6.3.6 Other Personnel

7.0 RESIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

8.0 DELIVERABLES AND SUBMITTALS

8.1 General Submittal Requirements

8.2 Independent Technical Review

8.3 CONTRACTOR Submittal Procedures

8.3.1 Control of Submittals

8.3.2 For Information Only (FIO) Submittals

8.3.3 Approved Submittals

8.3.4 Disapproved Submittals

8.3.5 Withholding of Payment

8.3.6 Approval of Submittals

8.3.7 Deviations

8.3.8 Information Only Submittals

8.3.9 As-Built Drawings

9.0 GREEN AND SUSTAINABLE REMEDIATION AND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES

10.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY

11.0 PUBLIC AFFAIRS

12.0 REAL ESTATE RIGHTS

13.0 INVOICES

14.0 REFERENCES

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEC United States Atomic Energy Commission

AFARS Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

AHA Activity Hazard Analysis

AIHA American Industrial Health Association

ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable

Am-241 Americium-241

ANS American Nuclear Society

ANSI American National Standards Institute

APP Accident Prevention Plan

AR Army Regulation

ARAR Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement

ARCO Atlantic Richfield Company

ARSO Assistant Radiation Safety Officer

ATCTS Army Training Certification Tracking System

ATP Authority to Proceed

B&W Babcock & Wilcox Company

Be Beryllium

BMP Best Management Practices

BWXT BWX Technologies, Inc.

CAAS Criticality Accident Alarm System

CADD Computer Aided Design and Drafting

CBDPP Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CDQMP Chemical Data Quality Management Plan

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CHP Certified Health Physicist

CIH Certified Industrial Hygienist

CLIN Contract Line Item Number

CONTRACTOR Remediation Contractor

COR Contracting Officer’s Representative

CPFF Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee

CPIF Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee

CPM Critical Path Method

CPR Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

CQC Contractor Quality Control

CQCSM Contractor Quality Control System Manager

CSP Certified Safety Professional

D&D Decontamination and Decommissioning

DA Department of the Army

DCAA Defense Contract Audit Agency

DCGL Derived Concentration Guideline Level

DCP Double Contingency Principle

DFARS Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

DOD United States Department of Defense

DOE United States Department of Energy

DOT United States Department of Transportation

DU Depleted Uranium

ECB Engineering Construction Bulletin

ELAP Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program

EM Engineer Manual

ER Engineer Regulation

ERPIMS Environmental Restoration Program Information Management System

EVMS Earned Value Management System

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation

FFP Firm-Fixed-Price

FID Flame Ionization Detectors

FS Feasibility Study

FSO Facility Security Officer

FSP Field Sampling Plan

FSSP Final Status Survey Plan

FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program

GFE Government Furnished Equipment

GFP Government Furnished Property

GIS Geographic Information System

GSR Green and Sustainable Remediation

HP Health Physics

HQUSACE Headquarters, United States Army Corps of Engineers

HSPD Homeland Security Presidential Directive

HTRW Hazardous, Toxic and Radiological Waste

IA/IT Information Assurance / Information Technology

ICPMS Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy

ICS Incident Command System

IDIQ Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity

IH Industrial Hygiene

IROFS Items Relied On For Safety

IT Innovative Technologies

ITR Independent Technical Review

KO Contracting Officer

LLRW Low-level Radioactive Waste

LQMP Laboratory Quality Management Plan

MARLAP Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols

MARSAME Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment

MARSSIM Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual

MC&A Material Control and Accountability/Accounting

MED Manhattan Engineer District

MIS Management Information System

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MPB Material Processing Building mrem Millirem

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet

NAS Network Analysis System

NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan

NCS Nuclear Criticality Safety

NDA Non-Destructive Assay

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NMAO Nuclear Material Accountability Officer

NMMSS Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System

NNSA National Nuclear Security Administration

NOV Notice of Violation

NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NRRPT National Registry of Radiation Protection Technologists

NUMEC Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation

OACSIM Office of the Assistant Secretary for Installation Management

O&M Operation and Maintenance

OSH Occupational Safety and Health

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

PADEP Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

PAT Proficiency Analytical Testing

PID Photo Ionization Detectors

PMP Project Management Professional

PPE Personal Protective Equipment

Pu-238 Plutonium-238

Pu-239 Plutonium-239

Pu-241 Plutonium-241

PWS Performance Work Statement

QA Quality Assurance

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan

QC Quality Control

Ra-226 Radium-226

Ra-228 Radium-228

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RFP Request for Proposal

RMS Resident Management System

ROC Radionuclides of Concern

ROD Record of Decision

RPP Radiation Protection Program

RSO Radiation Safety Officer

SAMS Safeguards Management Software

SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan

SATOC Single Award Task Order Contract

SHM Safety and Health Manager

SLDA Shallow Land Disposal Area

SNM Special…