AMENDMENT NO 0004 W912P621R0003 LAKE GEORGE.pdf

W81G6603023956

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

REFERENCE: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. W912P621R0003, LAKE GEORGE CANAL MIDDLE SECTION RESTORATION, LAKE

COUNTY, INDIANA

A. The Proposal Due Date and Time is extended by this Amendment. Therefore, proposals are due prior to 5:00 p.m. (Central Time) on July 30, 2021. -For further details regarding offer and evaluation information, please refer to Solicitation Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers.

-- THIS AMENDMENT CONITNUES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES --

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 41

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-Jul-2021

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 W912P621R0003

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Jun-2021

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

13-Jul-2021

CODE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, CHICAGO

231 SOUTH LASALLE STREET SUITE 1500

CHICAGO IL 60604-1437

W912P6 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912P621R0003

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

B. REVISED BID SCHEDULE: The government is providing a revised bid schedule (Section 00 10 00 – Solicitation Contract Form), which corrects the parent line item descriptions numbering at line items 0002, 0003, 0008, and 0021; and increases the quantity at line item 0005 from 1,010 SY to 2,045 SY. As a result of this revision, Proposers shall remove and replace the previously issued respective Section with the Revised Section 00 10 00 enclosed hereunder. Proposers shall provide their prices on the Revised Pricing Schedule.

C. AMENDED SPECIFICATION SECTIONS: The following Specification Sections have been revised. The revised sections are enclosed hereunder and replace the previously furnished sections.

SECTION NUMBER AND TITLE PARAGRAPH AND DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE

31 00 00 - EARTHWORK Para 3.1.2.1.5, 3.1.6.3, 3.4.4, 2.5 – Minor changes for clarification on subgrade preparation and compaction which are specific to the West Tank Farm bank controls.

Corrected paragraph for aquatic habitat stone to reference the riprap/stone spec (31 37 03). Clarified the sand classification that could be used in the bank control bedding layer.

31 36 19 – POLYMERIC MARINE FILTER MATTRESS Para 2.1.1, 2.1.1.1 – Material properties of the marine mattress were adjusted based on commercially available 12-inch mattresses.

31 05 19 – WEST TANK FARM BANK CONTROL

SYSTEM

Para 3.10 – Amendment clarifies language related to warranty requirements (found in 01 10 00 – General Provisions) with the monitoring and maintenance requirements of the option period (paragraph 3.10 of subject specification). Warranty relates to FAR provisions w/ warranty on materials and workmanship. Monitoring and Maintenance pertains to specified field investigation and maintaining the remedy during the option period.

35 21 10 – OIL BOOM INSTALLATION AND

MAINTENANCE

Para 3.3 – Amendment clarifies that unsoiled adsorbent oil booms may be replaced on a less frequent basis than the minimum specified (weekly) with approval from the COR.

COR will evaluate contractor evidence that oil booms do not require replacement, as needed, during construction.

35 14 50 – AQUATIC HABITAT Para 1.1, 3.7.1, 3.7.2, 3.7.3 – Specification referenced a submittal relating to an option bid item that was not included in contract. Language relating to option bid item (Adaptive Management Option) was removed.

Amendment makes clear that Contractor will follow the requirements of the specification for scope and pricing;

major changes related to ‘adaptive management’ will be evaluated in relation to scope requirements.

35 20 23.50 ENGINEERED SEDIMENT CAP Para 3.5 – Amendment clarifies language related to warranty requirements (found in 01 10 00 – General Provisions) with the monitoring and maintenance requirements of the option period (paragraph 3.5 of subject specification). Monitoring and Maintenance pertains to specified field investigation and maintaining the remedy during the option period.

00 10 00 - SOLICITATION Bid Item 0005 requires an increase in the estimated quantity from 1,010 SY to 2,045 SY due to an error in the initial calculation.

D. AMENDED DRAWING SHEETS: The following Drawing Sheets have been revised and are hereunder enclosed replacing the previously furnished respective sheets.

SHEET REF. NO. TITLE AND DESCRIPTION

G-005 Site Access Map – Original drawing mistakenly showed a southern access path along the railroad corridor. The access path was adjusted slightly to indicate access is entirely within an existing roadway, consistent with access agreements.

B-101 & B-102 Boreholes [North / South] Plan & Profile – The amendment provides a label for the blow count and corrects the water elevation label.

E. CONTRACTOR INQUIRIES: By this Amendment, the Chicago District, USACE responds to Contractor’s inquiries.

INQUIRY 1: Our steel suppliers are only holding their prices for up to 15 days due to the volatility of steel pricing. Pricing on steel sheeting has doubled since the beginning of this year. Will the Corps pay for stored raw materials so we can procure the material as soon as possible?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 1: Reference FAR 52.232-5 Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts(b)(2), which is included in the conttract and states:

In the preparation of estimates, the Contracting Officer may authorize material delivered on the site and preparatory work done to be taken into consideration. Material delivered to the Contractor at locations other than the site also may be taken into consideration if-

(i) Consideration is specifically authorized by this contract; and

(ii) The Contractor furnishes satisfactory evidence that it has acquired title to such material and that the material will be used to perform this contract.

Note that USACE will not pay for materils prior to contract award.

INQUIRY 2: A two-part question related to borrow source material sampling. Specification 31 00 00 Earthwork - Table 1: Indiana Environmental Testing - Fill references the compound Chromium (VI) with a concentration of 0.14 mg/kg relating to IDEMs migration to groundwater remediation criteria. Chromium (VI) is a very atypical analyte selected for testing of backfill materials.

a. Would USACE consider utilizing Chromium in lieu of Chromium (VI) as a borrow source testing parameter outlined in Table 1. Chromium appears to be more in line with what all previous investigations at the site have evaluated. Provided in the solicitation are several references to Chromium testing. 1) Attachment B Lake George Canal Test Results - Table 8 (page 251 of specifications) sample soil borings in the area for Chromium (not Cr6) and compared results to IDEM Commercial/Industrial Standards; 2) Table 1 (page 259) compared samples to Cr and Cr3 commercial/industrial values; 3) Table 3 (page 260) compared samples to Cr and Cr3 commercial/industrial values; and 4) in the Remedial Investigation and Baseline Assessment of Contaminated Sediments report, Table 3-3 Surficial Sediment: Inorganic Chemical Concentrations tested sediments for Chromium with results ranging from 12.1 to 520 mg/kg.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 2A: Analytes and detection limits for fill testing are based on Indiana Department of Environmental Management’s Remediation Closure Guide. USACE will evaluate compliance with the concentration limits of Table 1 of Specification Section 31 00 00 in terms of the project’s overall Quality Assurance Project Plan (Specification Section 01 35 45) and data quality objectives, which will include evaluation of laboratory certifications, method detection limits, and report limits.

b. Materials are to be tested utilizing Method SW 846; EPA 6000 for metals. The method detection limit for Chromium (VI) via this method is 0.15 mg/kg, thus the screening criteria (0.14 mg/kg) cannot be met. Will USACE consider modifying the concentration (i.e., residential direct contact criteria) or accepting non-detects via the method.

USASE RESPONSE INQUIRY 2B: Analytes and detection limits for fill testing are based on Indiana Department of Environmental Management’s Remediation Closure Guide. USACE will evaluate compliance with the concentration limits of Table 1 of Specification Section 31 00 00 in terms of the project’s overall Quality Assurance Project Plan (Specification Section 01 35 45) and data quality objectives, which could include evaluation of laboratory certifications, method detection limits, and reporting limits.

INQUIRY 3: Drawing G-005 indicates a Secondary Access Point in the SE Corner of the site. The access point appears to be along the railroad corridor. Is this location correct or should it be the road that runs N/S to the west of the railroad corridor?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 3: Yes, the secondary access point should be a hypothetical extension of White Oak Avenue. A correction to sheet of G-005 has been made.

INQUIRY 4: It appears that several Bid Items on the Bid Form (pages 3-22) reference the incorrect sub-bid items. For Example, Bid Item 0002 West Tank Farm Soil and Debris Handling and Disposal appears to reference Sub-Bid Items "0004AA and 0004AB” and should reference sub-bid items 0002AA and 0002BB. This discrepancy is found on bid items 0002, 0003, 0008, and 0021.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 4: This Amendment No. 0003 corrects the parent line item descriptions numbering at line items 0002, 0003, 0008, and 0021.

INQUIRY 5: Specification 31 00 00 Earthwork, Paragraph 3.4.4 Tolerance Tests for Subgrades - references the paragraph “Subgrade Preparation” to look for the number of checks required to confirm the degree of finish. In this specification there is only one paragraph of a similar name, 3.1.6.2 West Tank Farm Subgrade Preparations, and there is no mention of the number of checks required. Please provide guidance on the location of the Subgrade Preparation paragraph and the number of checks required.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 5: Paragraph 3.4.4 has been removed for clarity. Additionally, updates have also been made to a couple of references to paragraph “SUBGRADE PREPARATION” for clarity.

INQUIRY 6: Specification 01 22 00.00 10 Price and Payment Procedures – under this specification there is no allowance for mobilization or any pre-construction activities. Typically, these activities can take up to several months prior to any substantial work being completed on the project. Would the USACE consider adding a payment item for Mobilization and Demobilization similar to other projects?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 6: Based on the independent government estimate for this project, and its assumption regarding contractors means and methods of cap placement, MOB/DEMOB expenses do not appear substantial relative to the overall estimated construction cost. Therefore, the Mobilization and Demobilization Clause included in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Clause doesn’t apply to this procurement; consequentially, a separate mobilization and demobilization line item is not permissible (and, will not be added to the bid schedule).

INQUIRY 7: Specification 01 57 20.02 03 - Environmental Protection for Indiana – Paragraph 1.9F mentions that broken concrete can not be used as rip-rap. Would USACE reconsider the use of sampled clean recycled rip rap for use on some portions of the bank stabilization activities. Is it correct that in accordance with specification 31 36 19 Polymeric Marine Filter Mattress paragraph 2.1.5 that clean recycled concrete would be acceptable for use in the marine mattress and the above spec only applies to Rip Rap?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 7: Per Specification Section 31 16 19, Paragraph 2.1.5, utilization of recycled and processed concrete for the marine mattress is dependent on approval by the Contracting Officer. USACE will evaluate relevant details of the stone fill after award.

INQUIRY 8: Does the sheet pile wall installed to stabilize the cap need to be removed at the completion of the project in accordance with Specification 31 41 16 Metal Sheet Piling paragraph 3.3 Removal? It seems that is should be left in place to stabilize the cap in the future during storm events.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 8: The sheet pile wall should not be removed at the end of the project. The specification includes requirements if the sheets need to be removed for any reason, however the sheet pile wall is a permanent project feature.

INQUIRY 9: The Nationwide Permit references approved work shown in plans titled “Fig 2-Proposed Project and Existing Conditions” dated September 2020 and Figure 3A – Cross Section of Proposed Activities” dated November 2020. Can USACE provide these figures so that contractor can verify areas?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 9: The contract drawings represent the cross-section of proposed conditions

INQUIRY 10: Section 401 Water Quality Certification – Under Project Description it references placement of 706,000 cy of clean for the wetland shelf under habitat restoration. These quantities do not seem to correlate to the 9,004 sy of wetland shelf work identified on the bid form. Please clarify.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 10: Volumes are represented by the contract drawings. The WQC appears to include a transcription error. The shelf substrate volume in the 401-permit application was 706 CY. Note that this volume represents the surficial fill volume associated with the organic substrate. USACE will contact

IDEM.

INQUIRY 11: Are correctly sized boulders or cobbles mined from our own property during internal property improvements during mining activities acceptable for use per Specification 35 14 50 Aquatic Habitat paragraph

2.3.2 Boulder Source or 2.4.2 Cobble Source?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 11: Specification Section 35 14 50, Paragraph 2.3.2 and 2.4.2, commercial stone sources are required unless otherwise approved by the contracting officer's representative. Natural stone and cobble are required and will be verified by the Contracting Officer's Representative. Paragraph 1.3 of 31 37 03 allows the contractor to propose to furnish materials from another sources, pending COR approval and conformance with requirements in Table 1 of Sec 31 37 03 and Paragraph 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 of Section 31 00 00. The 31 00 00 - Earthwork specification was amended slightly to reflect the requirements.

INQUIRY 12: Specification 35 14 50 Aquatic Habitat Paragraph 3.7 discusses the use of the Adaptive Management Plan Option to address “Deficiencies that are determined to be significant, unexpected and no fault of the Contractor…” If the Adaptive Management Plan Option is exercised for these reasons will the Contractor be reimbursed for these activities, or should that be included in the base bid price?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 12: The adaptive management option has been removed from the specifications. Specification Section 35 14 50 has been amended accordingly.

INQUIRY 13: The current bid submittal date is July 12; however, due to the complexity of the project, large amount of technical and administrative requirements for submittal, and the due date falling shortly after a Federal Holiday, we respectfully request an extension of bid submittal.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 13: This Amendment No. 0004 extends the due date to 30 July 2021

INQUIRY 14: Specification 31 05 19 West Tank Farm Control identifies the Reactive Core Mats for Type I and Type II bank control as consisting of 3 separate mats:1) 2x -Organophilic clay encapsulated between geotextiles, 2) melt-blown polymer oleophilic absorbent encapsulated between two geotextiles. The layout is unclear, is it the intent to place the same Organophilic mat twice and then the oleophilic mat? Figure C-308 shows very little detail on the Bank Remedy detail.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 14: Correct, the intent is to place two layers of organophilic mat and one layer of oleophilic mat.

INQUIRY 15: Drawing C-109 General Notes 1 and 2 detail the installation depths of Type I and II bank controls between Elevation 580 and 571 ft. Drawing C-105 indicates that the water level is approximately 578.5 ft. This would mean that the majority of these mats are to be installed below the current water level. Specification 31 05 19 Part 1 details that the West Tank Farm bank control system must be constructed in the dry. The specifications or drawings do not provide any details for temporary dewatering structure (i.e., sheet pile wall or coffer dam) to construct this area in the dry. Please provide details and clarifications on temporary dewatering requirements. In addition, can the reactive core mats and marine mattress be installed in the wet without dewatering?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 15: The water surface elevation in the canal varies, as noted by the project plans. The water surface elevation at the time of construction is not known. The contractor will submit a plan for accomplishing the dewatering activities as described in Specification Section 31 00 00. Dewatering prior to installation of the bank controls enhances quality control and locating potential seeps.

INQUIRY 16: The construction industry in 2021 is facing strong inflationary pressures due to increased demand and constrained supply chains. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the consumer price index (CPI) for the energy sector (the sector that has the largest impact in Construction commodities and work) has increased by 27.1 percent this year (well outside the normal CPI fluctuations). The majority of the construction work on the project will be conducted in 2022; therefor, has the USACE considered any price adjustments, in line with CPI indexes, for the contractors should the volatility continue.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 16: USACE Cost Engineering develops programming and budgetary estimates by applying the latest CWCCIS Cost Indices for project cost escalation (per EM 1110-2- 1304). https://www.usace.army.mil/Cost-Engineering/cwccis/

INQUIRY 17: Several marine mattress vendors have been contacted and they have all expressed the following: The PMM thickness specified is a nominal 12” thickness. The manufacturer of the geogrid states the current geogrid specified is for thinner mattresses (6 or 8” thickness) and the specification would need to be updated to utilize the stronger uniaxial geogrid or a 12” thick mattress. Can the specification be updated with the stronger material, or the thickness reduced? A vendor has provided a sample USACE specification used previously specifying the higher strength material and mattress fabrication for a 12” thickness.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 17: Part 2.1.1 and the characteristics listed in Table 1 of specification SECTION 31 36 19 POLYMERIC MARINE FILTER MATTRESS have been amended to allow a uniaxial geogrid.

INQUIRY 18: Specification 31 41 16. Can you verify that new sheet piling wall will remain in place after capping is complete and pulling sheets/removal of wall would not be part of this contract? Can you confirm that sheets can be bare steel with no coating or interlock sealant? Plan sheet S-102 shows 205 wall feet of sheet with length of sheets being 32'. Plan sheet C-108 when scaled shows 238 Wall feet of sheeting. Can you confirm that 205' is the correct length?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 18: Response: Yes, the sheetpile will remain in place after capping is complete. Corrosion protection is required for the sheetpiles per 2.1 (a), but no need sealant for interlock.

Contractor must conduct survey prior of project starting to confirm the required length distance from each side of canal bank, refer to the spec for the survey requirements.

INQUIRY 19: Can you confirm that spudding of barge will be allowed during sheet pile installation?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 19: Utilizing spuds prior to installation of the engineered sediment cap is allowable for this contract. Penetrating the engineered sediment cap with spuds is not allowable.

INQUIRY 20: Is there any gradation or sieve analysis for the sand material specified in section 31 00 00 2.2?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 20: Spec section 31 00 00 Paragraph 2.2 allows both a well-graded sand (SW) and poorly-graded sand (SP), as defined by ASTM D2487.

INQUIRY 21:

35 20 23.50 1.1 specifies that 1.1 pounds of organophilic clay per square foot are required in the active/amended layer.

Can you confirm that the cost of the organophilic clay for the active/amended layer shall be carried as part of biditems 0004 and 0005 Sediment Cap Type A & B?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 21: Correct, the organophilic clay layer is a component of the Sediment Cap Type A and B, and costs associated with the amended layer’s organophilic clay base loading rate should be included in Bid Items 0004 and 0005, respectively.

INQUIRY 22: Can you confirm that the requirement for the content of organophilic clay material shall not be relational to the amount of sand material but will only be confirmed and verified by weight and area?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 22: Correct, the mass weight loading of organophilic clay material per unit area is specified.

INQUIRY 23: Bid item 0008 makes Sub-Line Item Level, "0010AA and 0010AB". There are no biditems 0010AA and 0010AB. Is it supposed to say 0008AA and 0008AB?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 23: This Amendment No. 0003 corrects the parent line item descriptions

INQUIRY 24: Can you confirm that the option listed as part of biditem 0008 would not result in additional volumes of sand material?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 24: Correct, mass weight loading of organophilic clay per unit area would increase if the option is awarded.

INQUIRY 25: Can you confirm that 0008 biditems will be paid based pounds delivered and placed and contractor shall make no allowance for waste and/or over placement?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 25: Provide a unit price associated with increasing the mass weight loading of the amended layer. See Specification Section 01 22 00.0010 (Paragraph 1.3.17). If the option is awarded, the additional organophilic clay quantity (as determined by mass weight per unit area) will be verified in-situ.

INQUIRY 26: Is the project exempt from sales tax on permanent materials?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 26: The Contractor shall comply with the FAR Clause 52.229-3 Federal, State And Local Taxes – see Section 00 70 00 of the Solicitation. To read the full text of this Clause, please visit: www.acquisition.gov/far.

INQUIRY 27: 02 61 13 Can you provide testing frequency? Can you provide a waste profile for material to be disposed of off-site? Is the material to be stockpiled within the staging area just north of the WTF? Is it anticipated that water treatment will be required during these excavation activities? If so, can you provide water quality treatment and discharge requirements? Under what biditem is the cost of construction of the stockpile area to be carried? If sediment needs to be amended/conditioned prior to being transported off-site shall that cost be incidental to excavation and disposal costs?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 27: Available soil quality data is presented within specification section 00 31 32.13. Sampling is required “as needed for disposal”, and as specified within other specification sections (e.g., sections 01 35 45 and 01 57 20.02 03). The disposal testing requirements will depend on the Contractor chosen disposal facility and their requirements. Based on available groundwater testing, it is not anticipated that water treatment will be necessary for this effort, however the contractor should evaluate dewatering needs based on their approach. Costs associated with stockpiling, handling, and disposal should be included in bid items associated with the corresponding work feature. For example excavation associated with the west tank farm banks has a separate bid item which includes stockpiling and transportation of material associated with the West Tank Farm Area (see Specification Section 01 22

00.00 10, paragraph 1.3.1.1).

INQIURY 28: 02 61 13 1.1 states that "The excavation work consists of removal of soil material as shown on the drawings". It is assumed that the area of excavation shall be in the area of Type I and Type II bank control. Can you provide an excavation cross section for this area? Excavation to take place across the entire area?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 28: Cross sections of the West Tank Farm Type I and Type II Bank Controls are shown on sheet C-305. Note that the remedy will be installed to match existing grade.

Existing condition profiles for the West Tank Farm banks are also provided as sheet C-306. Type I and Type II Bank Control areas are shown on sheets C-108 and C-109

INQUIRY 29: Is any removal or cutting of the wakefield wall required to complete the work that is part of biditem 0002?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 29: Partial removal of the wakefield wall be necessary as part of the West Tank Farm Bank Control installation. See Note 2 of plan sheet C-306 for requirements. Note that the condition and depth of the wakefield wall in this location is unknown.

INQUIRY 30: Can a bid item for Mobilization and Demobilization be added? If no then can you specify where Mob/Demob costs should be carried?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 30: Based on the independent government estimate for this project, and its assumption regarding contractors means and methods of cap placement, MOB/DEMOB expenses do not appear substantial relative to the overall estimated construction cost. Therefore, the Mobilization and Demobilization Clause included in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Clause doesn’t apply to this procurement; consequentially, a separate mobilization and demobilization line item is not permissible (and, will not be added to the bid schedule).

INQUIRY 31: Drawings show dock removal on drawing C-108. Would the cost of this removal be part of biditem 0003?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 31: Response: Correct, the former dock to be removed is debris associated with the sediment cap installation. See Specification Section 01 22 00.00 10, Paragraph 1.3.2.

INQUIRY 32: Section 401 Water Quality Certification calls out "Habitat restoration includes placement of 706k CY of clean fill for a wetland shelf". This quantity is much larger than what might be indicated on the drawings and specs. Can you clarify how this quantity was calculated?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 32: The 401 WQC application included 706 CY of surficial material for the wetland shelf. This appears to be a transcription error; USACE will follow up with IDEM and issue a correction, if necessary. Note that this wetland shelf volume is associated with the surficial substrate only.

INQUIRY 33: Is odor control anticipated during any of the excavation and capping activities

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 33: Odor control is not anticipated.

INQUIRY 34: It is likely that materials (aggregate, liner, etc.) will need to be imported to establish a construction area to process WTF excavation material. Will the removal, transportation, and disposal of those imported materials be paid on a unit price basis as part of bid item 0002 or shall they be incidental to another bid item. If incidental can you provide the bid item where those costs are to be carried?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 34: Correct, all incidentals necessary for soil and debris removal within the West Tank Farm should be included within Bid Item 0002. See Specification Section 01 22 00.00 10 Paragraph 1.3.1.

INQUIRY 35: What is the expectation of site prep/clearing and/or grubbing in the area of "Ecosystem Restoration"

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 35: The expectation for grubbing is that the contractor will remove trees as required in the contract to meet the performance standards listed in that section. Some sections of the site will require full clearing, others will require selective clearing. Selective clearing will be coordinated with USACE biologists prior to the beginning of the project.

The expectation for site preparation is that the contractor will perform activities that will result in a suitable planting area so that performance standards for native species establishment and weed control can be met.

INQUIRY 36: Drawing sheet G-004 shows End of Marine Mattress and End of Geomembrane approximately 25-30' north of Type I Bank restoration. Detail on sheet 27 appears to show it extending 5' beyond mattress placement. Please clarify which is correct.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 36: The Type I Bank Control is associated with reactive matting described in the plans and specifications. Type I Bank Control will be installed to the elevations shown on C-305. The marine mattresses and geomembrane will extend further up the bank than the reactive matting. Profiles and details for the Type I & II Bank Controls, marine mattresses, geomembrane, and other details are provided in C-305 and C-306. Please clarify if additional information is needed.

INQUIRY 37: Drawing sheet C-307. Wetland Shelf is shown to be material placed between elevation 582 and

575. Assumed that work performed within this area will be paid for under bid item 0009. Shall bid item 0009 be inclusive of stabilization, amended, Isolation, and substrate layers? Shall the thickness of layers in the shelf be those as shown in Cap A? Is the area show between elevation 575 - 573 "Sediment Cap Transition with submerged aquatic vegetation" to be paid under Cap A or Wetland Shelf bid item? Can you confirm that the wetland shelf unit price shall be inclusive of both Sand/Gravel top layer as well as Topsoil/Sand top layer?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 37: Correct, Bid Item 0009 includes all components of the Wetland shelf, including stabilization, amended, and isolation/substrate layers. Correct, the thicknesses are equivalent to Cap A, however the composition of the surficial (substrate) layer will change as described in the plans and specifications. The Sediment Cap A area is associated with the area shown on the plans, which includes cap material below the 575-ft contour. The wetland shelf area is associated with cap above the 575 contour. Wetland vegetation is covered by other bid items (for example, see Bid Item 0012). Wetland shelf unit price shall be inclusive of all material above the 575-ft contour.

INQUIRY 38: CLIN 0021 states that "The Contractor shall provide all labor, materials, and equipment to perform ORGANIC MIXTURE FILL activities identified at the Sub-Line Item Level, "0023AA and 0023AB."

Should this be 0021AA and 0021AB?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 38: This Amendment No. 0003 corrects the parent line item descriptions

INQUIRY 39: 1.3.27.1 States that Organic Mixture Fill shall be "Replacement fill will be the Wetland Shelf Substrate Organic Mixture used for grading and to replace stripped soil along the canal banks" Can you confirm that this is just the topsoil/sand mixture (30:70) material?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 39: Correct, see specification section 35 14 50, paragraph 3.1 – Placement of Wetland Shelf Habitat Substrate.

INQUIRY 40: Bid item 0026 - 0028 Payment specification calls for "controlling oil releases after sediment cap construction is complete, including equipment, labor, materials, storage, disposal, and supplies, after completion of the active project construction period." What is the owners expectation for the frequency of replacing oil boom materials? Monthly, Yearly?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 40: Oil boom replacement frequency is unknown after sediment cap construction is complete. The frequency will depend on a variety of factors, including the properties of the sorbent boom selected by the contractor. The frequency for required inspection of the oil boom is provided in section 35 21 10 – Oil Boom Installation and Maintenance.

INQUIRY 41: 31 05 19 3.10 states that there shall be a 5-year warranty period on bank controls. Can you confirm that this would only be the case if the optional bid items are awarded? 3.10 states that contractor shall make any necessary repairs during warranty period. Is it assumed that the cost of those unknown repairs are to be included in the cost of this proposal? Same question for 35 20 23.50 3.5.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 41: Warranty requirements are also described in Specification Section 01 10 00 – General Provisions, Paragraph 1.30 – Warranty. Warranty is required on all features and is not dependent on award of the options. Monitoring and Maintenance is described in Sections 31 05 19 Paragraph 3.10 and Section 35 20 23.50 Paragraph 3.5 are associated with the Maintenance and Monitoring options (for example, see specification section 01 22 00.00 10 – Paragraph 1.3.19). These paragraphs have been amended to make this distinction more clear.

INQUIRY 42: Proposal Evaluation System Section 1.9 Evaluation Factors states for Factor 4, “The Small Business Participation Plan will not be competitively rated but will be evaluated for minimum acceptability as described herein.” For the Small Business Participation Plan Adjectival Ratings, if an offer receives a marginal rating, does this meet the minimum acceptability?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 42: No, the minimum acceptability is a rating of “Acceptable.” Should the offeror receive a rating of marginal, it has not demonstrated an adequate approach or understanding of the small business objectives. Please refer to the Table “SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION ADJECTIVAL RATINGS” and note the differences in the 2 ratings. Thus, any rating below and “Acceptable” rating means the offeror has not achieved an acceptable rating for the Small Business Participation Plan.

Small Business Participation will be rated using the adjectival ratings listed below. (only provided in pertinent part to address the question)

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

INQUIRY 43: Proposal Evaluation System Section 1.9 Evaluation Factors states for Factor 4, “The Small Business Participation Plan will not be competitively rated but will be evaluated for minimum acceptability as described herein.” Additionally under 1.1 Evaluation Process, the Small Business Participation Plan is specifically excluded from the Evaluation Process. Should the Small Business Participation Plan Adjectival Ratings be only acceptable and unacceptable and therefore be a part of Proposal Compliance?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 43: Please refer to the above response to Question 1. No; the plan will be rated using all the adjectival ratings provided at the relative table. Per paragraph 3.0 “BASIS FOR AWARD” of Solicitation Section 00 21 16, “The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines to conform to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering the non-price factors described herein, and price.” (Emphasis added) Therefore, if the plan is not submitted, the offeror will not be in compliance with the essential requirements of the solicitation. If the plan is submitted and receives a rating above marginal, the plan will be considered in compliance with the proposal requirements; thereby meeting a part of “proposal compliance.”

INQUIRY 44: Proposal Evaluation System Section 1.9 Evaluation Factors states for Factor 4, “The Small Business Participation Plan will not be competitively rated but will be evaluated for minimum acceptability as described herein.” Should the Small Business Participation Plan Adjectival Ratings be only acceptable and unacceptable?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 44: The level of proposed participation of small businesses in the performance of this acquisition is being evaluated; thus, the adjectival ratings can’t be influenced by only 2 ratings “acceptable or unacceptable.” Please refer to Section 00 21 16 of the Solicitation document, wherein stated at 2.1. 4 SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN (SBPP) (FACTOR 4), “SBPP will be rated independently using an adjectival-based system as described herein this Solicitation.”

INQUIRY 45: There are two separate specifications for sand. Please provide direction as to what type of sand the USACE will be requiring for the 6” “Sand Cushion” for Type I and II Bank Control.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 45: Either sand type specified are acceptable for the Type I and II Bank Control Sand Cushions.

INQUIRY 46: Contract DrawingG-004 and C-105: Our quantity take-off for Bid Item 0005 Sediment Cap Type B appears to be double the quantity listed on the bid sheet. Please verify.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 46: Quantities have been updated and the bid schedule revised

INQUIRY 47: Due to the significant amount of site preparation, BP training, pre-work submittals and mobilization costs; we are requesting the addition of a pay item for “Mobilization” and or “Site Preparation”

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 47: Based on the independent government estimate for this project, and its assumption regarding contractors means and methods of cap placement, MOB/DEMOB expenses do not appear substantial relative to the overall estimated construction cost. Therefore, the Mobilization and Demobilization Clause included in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Clause doesn’t apply to this procurement; consequentially, a separate mobilization and demobilization line item is not permissible (and, will not be added to the bid schedule).

INQUIRY 48: Spec 01 10 00 Part 1.16: The section requires bi-weekly visits by a CIH. With an on-site full-time site health and safety officer working under the guidance of a corporate CIH, can this requirement be reduced to monthly visits?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 48: Bi-weekly visits by the CIH are required.

INQUIRY 49: Submittal Register & Section 01 35 26: These sections include information regarding Radiation and Radiation Safety Plan/Requirements.

Is there radiation contamination on this project?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 49: Available environmental data is presented within Specification Section 00 31 32 13.

INQUIRY 50: Should these sections be removed from the specifications?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 50: Submittals for these sections are not necessary if they do not apply to the Contractor's work plan. These sections will not be removed from the specifications.

INQUIRY 51: Spec 01 35 26 part 1.7 para. 1: The APP must be signed by an officer of the firm (Prime Contractor senior person), the individual preparing the APP, the on-site superintendent, the designated SSHO, the Contractor Quality Control Manager, and any designated Certified Safety Professional (CSP) or Certified Health Physicist (CIH)” A Certified Health Physicist and a CIH are not the same certification. If a requirement, please indicate the intended certification.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 51: Submit appropriate qualifications of safety disciplines, as they apply to the Contractor's work plan.

INQUIRY 52: Is the 1645 Calendar days inclusive of the optional biditems for three years of maintenance and monitoring? Is there a required completion date for installation of the cap? Required completion date for restoration activities?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 52: The 1,645 calendar days are allocated for the base requirements (base bid items). However, should the government award any of the options within the 542 calendar-day window, the contractor will use the remainder of the 1,645 calendar days to complete the option work. Please refer to the following FAR Clause, which is included at Solicitation Section 00 70 00.

52.217-7 OPTION FOR INCREASED QUANTITY--SEPARATELY PRICED LINE ITEM (MAR

1989)

The Government may require the delivery of the numbered line item, identified in the Schedule as an option item, in the quantity and at the price stated in the Schedule. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within the timeframe set forth below. Delivery of added items shall continue at the same rate that like items are called for under the contract, unless the parties otherwise agree.

At the government’s discretion, any, all or none of the OPTION WORK ITEMS in the bid schedule may be awarded no later than 542 calendar days following the Contractor’s acknowledgment of the Notice to Proceed. If or when exercised, the government will award the option(s) via a formal Contract Modification with no additional time added to the Contract period.

(End of clause)

INQUIRY 53: Can the contractor extend the limits of the west tank farm staging area north to provide more space in this area?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 53: The West Tank Farm staging area may be expanded further north to provide additional space provided the other requirements in the specifications are met, including the Coordination with Others requirements. As detailed within the specifications, the contractor must coordinate with BP regarding on-going construction activities within the west tank farm.

INQUIRY 54: Specification 01 10 00 1.30 and 35 2023.50 3.5 states that contractor will warrant all work for a period of 5-years. Is the five years inclusive of the time included as option 1, option 2, and option 3? Duration given for project is 1,645 Calendar days which is 4.50 years. Can you please clarify:

What is the end of warranty period for the base bid cap? If it is 5 years then is the base bid to be inclusive of 5 years of surveys, turbidity, oil boom monitoring, reports, etc? If these are to be included as cost as part of the base bid under which payment item should the costs be carried?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 54: As noted by Specification Section 01 10 00, paragraph 1.30, the warranty period covers materials and workmanship and will begin after the COR's preliminary acceptance of the base contract features of work. Warranty period on constructed features may overlap with the maintenance and monitoring option work, if awarded.

INQUIRY 55: Option 1-3: Would these apply only after the five year time period has expired? Would these apply to years 6, 7, and 8 of post cap acceptance?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 55: See Specification Section 01 22 00.00 10 (for example, paragraph 1.3.19.2). The first option period of maintenance and monitoring of the constructed features would begin after COR acceptance of the base features of work, if awarded.

INQUIRY 56: If we are to assume that the west tank farm excavation is to take place within the area of the Type I and Type II back control then will it be a requirement that the excavation area be dewatered? Where would the cost of temporary cofferdams be carried in the proposal? Specifications speak to compaction requirements for material placed at part of the bank control. Can the material be placed in the wet and if so would compaction requirements be waived?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 56: The excavation area is required to be dewatered in order to facilitate the QC of geosynthetic and geomembrane installations, particularly the anchoring into the anchor trench, continuous overlap along the slope, and proper union with the engineered cap.

Seating of the geomembrane in the anchor trench can be difficult to achieve underwater.

Additionally, dewatering allows for the observation of oil seeps that the bank control work intends to mitigate. The cost of cofferdams are considered “other incidentals necessary to complete the work” listed for Bank Remedy Type I and II.

INQUIRY 57: If dewatering for Bank Control I and II is required can sheetpile be drive in this area to create a temporary cofferdam?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 57: Sheetpile can be driven where feasible. Underground utilities exist between station 19+00 and 19+60 and may require other methods to create a cofferdam

INQUIRY 58: Can the contractor build an access over the bank control area after it is installed to access the river from the South East contractor staging area? Given the power lines to the west of that area, the best place to access is where the bank control section is meant to be installed.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 58: Yes, the contractor may develop canal access along the west tank farm bank controls so long as the bank controls remain protected.

INQUIRY 59: Is it the expectation that the contractor will amend the topsoil with organic matter to achieve the very high organic content requirement? If so are there any products that are recommended or prohibited from use?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 59: The contractor may utilize amended topsoil, as necessary.

Describe all materials and methods for placement of the habitat layer within the Instream Habitat

Placement Plan and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Placement Plan. Soil sources and amendments will be evaluated by USACE as part of evaluation of the submittal. Recommended amendments may include compost consistent with the U.S Composting Council Guidelines. The contractor should not utilize amendments inconsistent with project goals and objectives such as amendments with an elevated risk of unwanted constituents or properties (e.g., amendments sourced from manure which could contain invasive seeds or agricultural wastes treated with pesticides/herbicides).

INQUIRY 60: Can The contractor split the work area into Cap management units in order to expedite sampling and approvals for sections of the placed cap in order to keep operations going between layers of the cap.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 60: The contractor must meet all requirements of Specification Section 35 20 23.50, including placement in a manner that achieves contiguous capping layers for the full project area. The cap installation work plan should not propose methods that would create discontiguous capping layers, for example, those that would result from consolidation/settlement of individual management areas.

INQUIRY 61: Can the testing of the settlement layer be performed prior to the 90 day settlement window so the contractor can resume work at the site immediately after the 90 days expires? The earlier assessment of stabilization layer would also assist in the procurement of Organoclay and the potentially long lead time on getting additional product if it is determined that more than the required 1.1 #/sf is necessary.

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 61: A minimum 90-day period is necessary to evaluate settlement and oil expression into the stabilization layer for organcophilic clay loading rate determination. Per Specification Section 35 20 23.50, Paragraphs 3.2.2 and 3.2.3, the stabilization layer shall be inspected for NAPL saturation after the pre-consolidation period.

INQUIRY 62: Top of sheeting wall is elevation 571.5. Waterline is expected to be around 578'. What is the intent and purpose of the sheeting wall does not extend above water? Can the sheets be extended above water during cap construction to aid in sheen and turbidity control? Can sheets be cut or driven to grade upon cap completion?

USACE RESPONSE INQUIRY 62: The intent and purpose of the sheet pile wall is to prevent lateral sediment displacement of existing sediment during cap placement. Sheets can not be installed in a manner that inhibit the flow capacity of the canal/floodway, or increase risk of upstream flooding impacts. Sheets must be installed consistent with federal, state and local requirements.

INQUIRY 63: The contractor is required to construct the West Tank Farm system in the dry. Based on Drawing C- 305 the WSEL ranges from 584.3 and 575.0 and the toe of Type II – Bank Control extends down the slope to

572. To perform in the dry, the contractor will need to build a cofferdam that can accommodate between 3 and 12 feet of water.