Am1.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICAITON NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicble)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offers 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 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 your 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 APPROPIRATION DATA (If required)

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

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

CHECK ONE 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.

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

1 51

0001 Nov 10, 2010

US Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles Dist.

Contracting Division, Atn: Pat Bonilla P.O. Box 532711 Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325

W912PL-11-R-0002

Oct 21, 2010

IDIQ CONTRACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH US EPA REGION 9, SULPHUR BANK MERCURY MINE (SBMM) SUPERFUND SITE, CLEAR LAKE, LAKE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

1) Amendment issued to provide the site visit slide presentation and site visit sign-in sheets, 50 pages attached.

2) Revise solicitation provision 52.215-4006 entitled, "Solicitation Inquiries", paragraph 2, to read as follows:

2. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries by close of business November 18, 2010 in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation if necessary.

Site Visit 5 November 2010

Sulphur Bank Mercury Mine Superfund Site RI/FS

Meeting Agenda

• Introductions

• Site History & Background

• Solicitation

• Award

• Proposal

• Reports of Work

• Schedule

• Site Visit

Introductions

• Richard Sugarek, USEPA Region IX, Remedial Project Manager

• James Maes, USACE Los Angeles District, Project Manager

• Patricia Bonilla, USACE Los Angeles District, Contracting Officer

• Thad Fukushige, USACE Los Angeles District, Contracting Officer’s Representative

Sulphur Bank Mercury Mine

USACE IA

Technical Support for OU-1 and OU-2 RI/FS

Location Map

Clear Lake Impairment

• High levels of methyl mercury in fish tissue

• 1987 CA DHS (now OEHHA): fish consumption advisory for Clear Lake; updated 2005

• Clear Lake added to Clean Water Act 303(d) List of

Impaired Water Bodies in 1988

• SBMM added to NPL in 1990

• 2003 Basin Plan Amendment: TMDL to lower mercury levels in Clear Lake to attain beneficial uses of fishing and wildlife habitat

Health Risks

• Consumption of Fish Containing High Levels of Mercury

• Direct Contact with Mine Wastes Containing High Levels of Mercury, Antimony and Arsenic

Direct Contact

• Residential use of the site presents health risks to all age groups.

• In recreational use scenarios, the greatest health risk is to children, aged 1to 6, from ingestion of mercury in soils.

• Adolescents, aged 7 to 18, are also at risk.

• Women of childbearing age are at risk.

Site Map

Superfund Removal Actions

• 1990 - Placed on NPL

• 1992 - Waste Rock Dam Re-grading

• 1997 - Elem Indian Colony Residential Soil

• 1999 - Surface Water Control

• 2000 - Geothermal Well Closures

• 2006 – Elem Indian Colony Mine Waste Removal

• 2008 – Sulphur Bank Mine Road

• 2010 – BIA 120

Operable Units

• Operable Unit-1

– Terrestrial Mine Site

– Waste rock, tailings, and ore piles

– Herman Impoundment

• Operable Unit-2

– Clear Lake

– North Wetland

Program Overview

SBMM Operable Unit 1

Operable Unit-1 Status

• Remedial Investigation (RI)

– Draft in 2002

• Feasibility Study (FS)

– Agency Review Draft in 2004

– Responded to comments and prepared revised draft in August 2006

AIRBORNE CONDUCTIVITY

Herman Impoundment

Clearlake

Herman Impoundment Water Quality

• Low pH

– pH of 2.5 to 3.0

– Both acid rock drainage (ARD) and hydrothermal impacts

• Elevated metals

– Al, As, Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Se, Zn

– Mercury concentrations less than 2 µg/L

• Elevated hydrothermal constituents

– ammonia, boron, chloride, sodium, TDS

– sulfate (both ARD and hydrothermal contributions)

• Estimate 42 lbs (19 kg) per year mercury

– transported from SBMM through Waste Rock Dam to Clear Lake using May

2008 data and groundwater model

EPA Remedial Alternative 6 Operable Unit-1

Conceptual Model Current Conditions

Conceptual Model After OU-1 Remedial Action

Herman Impoundment Water Treatment

• Treatment facility designed to treat maximum of 200 gpm and average 100 gpm

• Maintain Herman Impoundment elevation about 5 feet below Clear Lake elevation

• Three treatment levels evaluated

• Ammonia removal evaluated

Herman Impoundment Water Disposal

• Alternative 1 – No Action

• Alternative 2 – Discharge to Southeast

Geysers Effluent Pipeline (SEGEP)

• Alternative 3 – Discharge to new pipeline for injection at The Geysers

• Alternative 4 – Injection into Sulphur Bank geothermal system

• Alternative 5 – Discharge to Clear Lake

Key Issue for OU-1

• Additional screening evaluations of Herman Impoundment treatment alternatives

• Additional screening evaluations of Herman Impoundment disposal alternatives

SBMM Operable Unit 2

North Wetland Investigations

North Wetland

North Wetland Investigation

Background and Previous Investigations

• Physical Characteristics of North Wetland

– 28 acres formed by dikes from island to shore – 1915 to 1918

– Seasonal filling and drying

– Very little open water, shallow, tule-filled with old cut channels and edge ponding

– No open water connection to Clear Lake

– Mine waste disposal at the Northwest Waste Rock Pile

(NWWRP)

• Previous Investigations

– EPA/UCD: mid-1990s

– Tetra Tech: 2000/2001

– Elem Indian: Colony since 2004

– CH2M HILL/ Tetra Tech: 2004 - 2007

Objective

• Conduct limited sampling and characterization of sediment, detritus, surface water, and biota in the North Wetland to estimate the baseline levels of contaminants of concern

Media Sampled

• Water

– Trace metals, mercury, and methyl mercury (total and dissolved)

• Detritus: Upper sediment layer, highly-organic

– All analytes

• Sediment: Deeper mineral sediment (clay)

– All analytes

• Biota: Tules, zooplankton (Daphnia), insects, snails, tadpoles, and small fish (eggs from aquatic-dependent birds sought but not found)

– All analytes, whole-body composite samples, except not methylmercury for fish

Conclusions

• Possible influence of waste rock and leaching in the immediate area of Site 2 of the wetlands (low pH, higher metals, lower biota abundance and diversity) – highest pH at Site 6

• In the 2004 to 2007 data set temporal patterns for mercury show decrease in mercury concentration in water over time (but not for sediment, detritus, or biota)

• Comparisons to 1990s UC Davis data indicate decreased total and dissolved methyl mercury but increased dissolved mercury in water (but not total) as compared to the 2004 to 2007 data – sediment methyl mercury has also significantly decreased in concentration since the 1990s investigations

• Other metals, in addition to mercury, above showing “probable risk” are aluminum and manganese

• Sampling provided a good baseline characterization of the spatial and temporal variability of contamination within the wetlands for mercury, methyl mercury, and other metals

Oaks Arm Sediment Pilot Capping Study

Capping Study General Objectives

• Collect data that will be used in the Operable Unit (OU)-2 Feasibility Study

• Focus on specific objectives to optimize full-scale sediment capping (if selected)

– Cap Design and Construction

– Chemistry and Fate and Transport

Monitoring

Oaks Arm Sediment Pilot Capping Study

Mercury in Surface Sediment Oaks Arm

Oaks Arm Sediment Investigation

Mercury in Surface Sediment Adjacent to Waste Rock Dam

Methyl Mercury in Surface Sediment Adjacent to Waste Rock Dam

Cap Design and Construction Objectives

• Identify and evaluate a borrow source

• Identify and evaluate challenges with cap placement

– Minimize sediment resuspension

– Evaluate mixing with contaminated sediment

• Evaluate erosion

• Evaluate sediment consolidation

• Evaluate need for geotextile materials

Chemistry and Fate and Transport Monitoring Objectives

• Evaluate potential mobility of metals

• Evaluate pore water release

• Evaluate the potential for enhanced mercury methylation

• Evaluate bioturbation and colonization of cap material

• Evaluate need for reactive cap material

Pilot Cap Locations

HERMAN

IMPOUNDMENT

ELEM

INDIAN

COLONY

Pilot Cap Locations and Mercury

Pilot Cap Design Performance Criteria

• Mixing Layer – stabilizes sediment and forms cap construction platform

• Isolation Layer – prevents migration of contaminated fines and retards chemical flux

• Bioturbation Layer – prevents burrowing, ingestion, and disturbance by benthic organisms

• Erosion Layer – prevents erosion of underlying cap layers

Pilot Cap Verification and Environmental Monitoring

• Baseline Monitoring (Pre-Construction)

– Bathymetry

– Chemical Characterization (sediment and pore water)

– Geotechnical/physical Characterization

– Biological Characterization

– Surface Water Quality Monitoring

– Lake currents, temperature, water level, and wind pattern

• Construction Monitoring

– Cap Verification (thickness, location, coverage area)

– Surface Water Quality Monitoring

• Post-Construction Monitoring

– Similar parameters/measurements as Baseline Monitoring

– Monitor at periodic intervals (1, 3, 6, and 12 months after cap placement)

The information for Solicitation No. W912PL-11-R-0002 was posted on 21 OCT 2010 @ the following address:

https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R- 0002/listing.html

Solicitation https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html� https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html� https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html� https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html� https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html� https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html� https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html� https://www.fbo.gov/spg/U5A/COE/DACA09/W912PL-11-R-0002/listing.html�

Award

• Award

– Indefinite Delivery Indefinite-Quantity

(IDIQ) contract

– Firm fixed price task orders will be issued

– One (1) Base Year with four (4) potential Option years for maximum total aggregate contract amount of $10M

– Set aside for Small Business concerns

Award

• Award –Contract tasks are intended to be performed over an approximate 3.5 year period

–Task Order No. 1 is intended to be performed over an approximate 1 year period

Proposal

• Technical Proposal (Volume I)

– Volume I/Tab I- Technical Approach

• Sub-Factor I.1 Understanding of the Work

• Sub-Factor I.2 Detailed Project Schedule

– Volume I/Tab 2- Management

• Sub-Factor II.1 Personnel Qualifications

– Element II.1.1 Key Personnel Experience, Education

– Element II.1.2 Project Team Roles and Responsibilities

• Sub-Factor II.2 Finance and Accounting

• Sub-Factor II.3 Sustainable Practices

– Volume I/Tab 3- Past Performance

Volume I http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTb_t4J9NMU0UAsZOjzbkF/SIG=12eil3ad5/EXP=1288993016/**http:/www.clipartpal.com/_thumbs/pd/education/book_02.png�

Proposal

• Price Proposal (Volume II)

– Volume I/Tab I- Cover Letter

– Volume I/Tab 2- Pricing Schedule

– Volume I/Tab 3- Supplemental Pricing

Information

• Selection is made via best value trade-off method

– Technical proposals

– Price proposals

Volume II http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTb_t4J9NMU0UAsZOjzbkF/SIG=12eil3ad5/EXP=1288993016/**http:/www.clipartpal.com/_thumbs/pd/education/book_02.png�

Reports of Work

• Progress Reports

– Executive Summary

– Task Order Reports

– Contract Invoice Backup Reports

– Monthly Safety Exposure Reporting

• Work Plans

• Project Reports

• Cost Recovery Documentation

• Non-CLP Analytical Services Tracking

Schedule

Activity Name Duration Start Finish Preadvertise 15 10/4/2010 10/19/2010 Solicitation Advertised 39 10/21/2010 11/29/2010 Site Visit & Preproposal Conference 1 11/5/2010 11/5/2010 Proposals Due 1 11/29/2010 11/29/2010 Contract Award 1 12/17/2010 12/17/2010 http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTb_rjKNNM92MAhEujzbkF/SIG=12a2dd32o/EXP=1288993379/**http:/www.eecs.harvard.edu/~uribraun/img/schedule.jpg�

Site Visit