Amendment_0008_FINAL.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

This amendment is being issued to respond to requests for information (RFIs) and extend the proposal due date to Tuesday, October 10, 2017.

This amendment includes attachment "Amendment 0007_Attachment - best practices.pdf", w hich w as previously listed in error as an attachment to Amendment 0007. Also included w ith this amendment are the follow ing attachments:

Amendment 0008_Attachment - revised PWS 20170914.pdf, Amendment 0008_revised Solicitation Attachment H_20170914, and Amendment 0008_Attachment - site trailer location.pdf.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 18

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Sep-2017

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 W912WJ-17-R-0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

07-Jun-2017

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

15-Sep-2017

CODE

U S ARMY ENGR DISTRICT, NEW ENGLAND

696 VIRGINIA RD

CONCORD MA 01742-2751

W912WJ 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912WJ-17-R-0005

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:

1. Question: In Attachment G, 7.1, there is a requirement to provide connections to water and sewer service for the government trailer “if available”. Can the location of available water, sewer, electrical, phone and internet services be shown or informed where these facilities are located for the contractors to utilize?

Response: There is no public water or sewer service at the site. Residences in the area have private water and sewer. Per the PWS (Section 7.1), bottled water shall be provided by the awardee if there is no existing water service. In addition, the PWS also states that sewer service shall be provided via a holding tank. Power, phone, and internet are available at the power pole located near the residential properties at the northern entrance to the site. The proposals should include pricing for extending the power, phone, and internet service 750’ along the access road. The site office trailers are to be located in this area (see attached figure). The PWS Section 6.3 Task 3 – Site Preparation has been revised to state that the power, phone, and internet service shall be extended 750 feet and is attached to this amendment.

2. In Attachment H, 2 (B), there is a requirement that sub-contractors provide an Appendix I-5.

Please confirm this requirement is only for Team Subcontractors.

Response: Appendix I-5 is for Team Members, as described in Factor 4 per Amendment 0004, performing work on the Seed Task Order. Sub-contractors who are not Team Members, and lower tier sub-contractors, do not need to complete Appendix I-5. Prime offerors should complete Appendix I-4 for the Seed Task Order. Any lower tier subcontractors can simply be listed in the subcontractor tab of Appendix I-5.

3. Question: Considering the preliminary design work required to accurately assess the scope and cost of this work, please extend the proposal due date by two weeks.

Response: This amendment extends the proposal due date to Tuesday, October 3, 2017.

4. Question: We respectfully request an extension of 2 weeks following receipt of all questions for this proposal effort.

Response: See response to Comment #3.

5. Question: Will the proposal due date be extended to allow bidders adequate time to incorporate government responses to questions? Please consider granting a two-week extension from the date that responses are provided to questions.

Response: See response to Comment #3.

6. Question: There are several Programmatic responsibilities and plans/reports required to manage the overall ID/IQ contract, in addition to the specific Seed Task Order requirements:

i. Will a Program Management Office (PMO) Task Order be issued separately under this IDIQ Contract, or will all PMO functions be required to be budgeted for within the individual Task Order proposals?

Response: PMO functions will be budgeted within the individual Task Order Proposals.

ii. If under the Task Order proposals, how many concurrent Task Orders are anticipated to be ongoing concurrently?

Response: Currently, we anticipate only one Task Order at a time.

7. Question: W912WJ17R0005 – page 95 of 118: “Utilities and fuel costs shall not be included in the Seed Task Order estimate.” Does this apply to all parties (prime, team members and minor subcontractors) performing work on the site?

Response: All ODC charges, including utilities and fuel costs, should be included for all parties performing work under the Seed Task Order. Page 95 of the Solicitation has been revised to clarify that the utilities and fuel costs shall be included in the Seed Task Order cost estimate.

8. Question: Please confirm that OSHA rules and regulations are applicable to this site, and that MSHA will not apply.

Response: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rules and regulations are applicable to this site. The offeror must comply with FAR 52.236-7, Permits and Responsibilities clause of the contract. In connection with this clause, the offeror is responsible to verify whether compliance with Mine Safety Health Administration (MSHA) is required.

9. Question: As stated in Attachment G, the O&M and troubleshooting of the Bio Reactor

System, is it correct that all “repairs required” would fall under a cost reimbursable item?

Response: O&M and troubleshooting of the Bio-Reactor System is a Firm Fixed Price item under Task 10.

10. Question: Please provide the list of design elements included in the OU3 Final Remedial Design drawings that were constructed and provide the as-built information for these constructed elements.

Response: Constructed elements in the OU3 final Remedial Design drawings include one bio-reactor treatment system and one horizontal drain. The Record Drawings are provided in .pdf form in the Remedial Action Completion Report dated March 2016, and posted on the EPA Superfund website (www.epa.gov/superfund/callahan).

11. Question: Please confirm how many bioreactor treatment systems are currently installed and operational and provide as-built drawings of each.

Response: There is currently one bio-reactor treatment system installed and operational.

Record Drawings of the bio-reactor treatment system are provided in the Remedial Action Completion Report dated March 2016 (www.epa.gov/superfund/callahan).

12. Question: Please supply the contractors “As built” information for OU3 constructed items?

Response: See Response to Question #10.

13. Question: Can you please supply the contractors with AutoCAD drawings of OU3 Final Design Remediation Report?

Response: Offerors who wish to utilize the AutoCAD files must request them via email to Contract Specialist Jessica Loc (jessica.r.loc@usace.army.mil). The email subject should be “W912WJ-17-R0005 Callahan Mine – Files Request.” Please identify the specific drawings and specifications within the OU3 Final Design Basis Report that you are requesting. Please include the email address of each report recipient in your email. Designated recipients will receive an email with instructions to download the file which contains the requested drawings and/or specifications. Requests for AutoCAD files must be submitted by 20 September 2017.

14. Question: Please confirm how many stormwater treatment ponds are currently installed and operational and provide as-built drawings of each.

Response: There are no stormwater treatment ponds currently installed to control surface water flow at the Tailing Impoundment.

15. Question: Can you please supply the contractors with the MACTEC 2009 Geotechnical Evaluation Report?

Response: The MACTEC 2009 Geotechnical Evaluation Report is posted on the EPA Superfund website (www.epa.gov/superfund/callahan). At the webpage, select “Administrative Records” in the box on the right hand side and then select the 2009 ROD

Admin Record from the box on that page. There are many site documents located within the 2009 ROD including the requested report.

16. Question: Request for clarification of what specific design features included in OU3 Final Remedial Design are included in the Seed Project (i.e., stormwater ponds, second bio-reactor vaults, etc.)

Response: The Seed Task Order PWS identifies the requirements for the Seed Task Order.

The Seed Task Order PWS does not include stormwater ponds, additional bio-reactor treatment systems, or additional horizontal wells.

17. Question: Can you please supply the contractors with the most current Lidar topographic survey (AutoCAD)

Response: The most recent LiDAR topographic survey data (March 2016) was provided in Amendment 5.

18. Question: Is an acronym list included within the page limits?

Response: Yes.

19. Question: Question 5 in Amendment 4 asks to: “Please identify the # of past performance projects required for each team member identified in Factor 4 (Organizational Approach).”

Question 5 Response: “As stated in Factor 5, Past Performance – Submission Requirements, pg 91, past performance information (per paragraph 5a and 5b) shall be submitted for each project submitted by the Offeror in Factor 1 (Team Experience) and for each Team Member identified in Factor 4 (Organizational Approach).

Page 88 of 118, Factor 1, Paragraph 2 of the original RFP states: “At least one project shall be provided for the prime Offeror (the entity signing the SF33) and for each Team Member who is proposed to perform the following key work functions: engineering, earthworks construction, slope stability, and geotechnical testing and analysis.”

Because of the directions on page 88 of 118 of the original RFP, we assumed that if a team has members that are discussed in Factor 4 (Organizational Approach) that are not performing the key functions, but that bring desirable expertise to the team, that no Project Description was needed for them in Factor 1 (Team Experience). Is this assumption correct, and if so, what, if anything, should be supplied for Past Performance for such team members?

Response: See Request For Information (RFI) Response #13 under Amendment 0007.

20. Question: Factor 4 - the RFP states that past performance should be submitted for projects in Factor 1 AND for each team member. If a team member is not providing of one the projects in Factor 1, what is required for their past performance?

Response: See response to Question #19, above.

21. Question: It is our understanding that under the SBA mentor-protégé program rules, projects submitted by a mentor-protegee JV do not need to be differentiated between member firms. Please clarify that the requirement to submit / identify a project from each JV member firm is for JVs outside of the mentor-protégé program.

Response:

This is incorrect. The procuring activity is required to consider work done individually by each partner to the JV as well as any work done by the JV itself previously. All offerors are advised to review, and comply with, the SBA regulations for JV agreements that are applicable to the particular business entities partnered in the JV.

22. Question: The solicitation includes both a Davis Bacon Act Heavy Construction Wage Decision and a Service Contract Act Wage Determination.

a. Can you advise us if the seed project work is covered by only the Construction Wage

Decision or by a combination of both the Construction and Service Contract Wage Rates?

Response: The Seed Task Order project work includes a combination of both the Construction and Service Contract Wage Rates. Please see the table provided in Amendment 0003 which identifies Service Tasks and Construction Tasks.

b. If the response to (1) is a combination of both construction and service rates, please advise which rates cover what work? Thank you.

Response: Please see the table provided in Amendment 0003 which identifies Service Tasks and Construction Tasks.

23. Question: In the absence of an audit report/finding/letter from CFAO for the determination of adequacy of accounting system per Section 5 of factor 6, is it acceptable to submit a completed Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System Checklist?

Response: If an offeror does not have an approved accounting system at time of proposal, please so state in section 5 of factor 6 of the proposal. There is no requirement to submit a Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System Checklist with the proposal. Source selection and evaluation of proposals will not be influenced by the adequacy status of accounting systems. Additional information may be requested from the offeror, and the accounting system may be reviewed for adequacy as part of administrative processes prior to award. No award will be made of this contract to an offeror whose accounting system has not been determined to be adequate for cost reimbursement contracts.

24. Question: For attachment I-1, markups tab, cell B15 is a summation of all markup types where all markup rates are applied to a base of direct dollars only. Our accounting system is not set up this way but rather our overhead is applied to a base of the sum of direct dollars and fringe. Our G&A is applied to a base of the sum of direct dollars, fringe, and overhead.

Should we convert our markups rates to what would be the equivalent rate if they were to be applied to direct dollars only? If not, can we replace the formula in cell B15 with our equivalent total markup rate?

Response: You may replace the formulas in the markups tab with your accounting system’s calculation of markups. Any changes from the existing spreadsheet shall be clearly identified and an explanation of the new calculations shall be provided. The revised calculations must be transparent and supported by sufficient information so that the Government can verify all calculations and complete the probable cost analysis. See revised Solicitation Attachment H as an attachment to this amendment.

25. Question: New standpipe piezometers (SPP-01 to SPP-14) are proposed in Appendix E, Section 4 to monitor the drainage effects of the horizontal drains on topographical depressions (low spots) below the proposed horizontal drains, since horizontal drains may not affect these areas. Is the design intent to continue to install these piezometers as described in Appendix E Section 4 if the horizontal wells are no longer incorporated into the design?

Response: Offeror is responsible for preparing a Geotechnical Monitoring Plan. The Geotechnical Monitoring Plan should include any geotechnical monitoring the contractor deems necessary to monitor the stability of the tailing impoundment to demonstrate that the work required under the Seed Task Order PWS meets the safety performance standards.

26. Question: Appendix E, Section 4.1.2 states: “Existing standpipe piezometers/monitoring wells and VWPs should be monitored prior to and following the installation of the horizontal drains for pre-construction dewatering. The following monitoring wells and piezometers should be utilized for monthly water level monitoring to demonstrate the effectiveness and progress of dewatering:

• SB-1141(OW), SB-1142(OW), PZ-602, MW-602S, MW-602D (south portion of impoundment)

• PZ-605D, MW-605S, MW-605D (east central impoundment)

• MW-604S, MW-604D, MW-604R (northeast dam crest)

• PZ-706, MW-706, MW-722R (southeast dam crest)

• PZ-705, MW-705 (central dam crest)

It is anticipated that these wells/piezometers will be removed during the cut/fill operations and will need to be replaced following completion of the impoundment regrading.”

Since the horizontal wells are assumed to not be included in the remedial design, do these wells/piezometers need to be replaced? If so, is there information on the existing wells/piezometers to evaluate material and installation costs?

Response: The Seed Task Order PWS identifies the tasks required to complete the initial phase of the Tailing Impoundment remediation. The installation of additional horizontal drains is not included in the Seed Task Order PWS. Offeror is responsible for preparing a Geotechnical Monitoring Plan. The Geotechnical Monitoring Plan should include any geotechnical monitoring necessary to monitor the stability of the tailing impoundment to demonstrate that the work required under the Seed Task Order PWS meets the performance standards.

27. Question: Please confirm that it is acceptable for the offeror to update the tabs, other than

“summary”, in the I-4 and I-5 attachments in order to accommodate the additional tasks 2.6 and 2.7 added on the summary tab in amendment 0004.

Response: Spreadsheets were revised to include Tasks 2.6 and 2.7 in Amendment 5.

28. Question: Please confirm offerors ability to add additional labor categories in Appendix

I1/I2.

Response: Additional labor categories can be added as necessary.

29. Question: Please confirm offerors may modify formulas and spreadsheet links within the

Appendices (I1-I5) to apply indirect costs in accordance with the offeror’s accounting system.

Response: The spreadsheets may only be altered as indicated in Response #24, above, and as indicated in Appendix H (revised and attached in this Amendment).

30. Question: It states on page 19 of the solicitation (Section 7.5 Sampling and Analysis Quality

Control) that "Laboratory (ies) to be used by the contractor shall be certified by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) or an equivalent agency". In other sections of the solicitation it mentions using a DoD ELAP accredited laboratory. If our laboratory is NELAP accredited and can provide the SEDD deliverable as well as the CLP-like data packages, can we use them for this project?

Response: Yes. As stated above, the laboratory must be certified by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) or an equivalent agency. The PWS has been revised to delete the DoD ELAP references (see revised PWS attached to this Amendment).

31. RFP Reference: Page 89 of 118 of the original RFP states: “Projects provided must be completed within the past eight (8) years, as of the issue date of this RFP, to be considered recent”

Question: In light of the referenced RFP excerpt, we assume that USACE invites projects that are either complete or ongoing but at least some substantial percent complete (e.g., 75% complete), as long as they fall within the required 8-year timeframe. Please confirm that Offerors are not precluded from submitting ongoing projects in Factor 1 – Team Experience.

Also, please clarify the percent complete (e.g., 75%) acceptable for ongoing projects.

Response: The requirement will not be relaxed. Projects provided must be completed within the last 8 years, as of the issue date of this RFP, to be considered recent.

32. Question: Please clarify if the seed task scope of work includes a geosynthetic lining of the drainage channels that require aggregates?

Response: A geosynthetic liner is included in the Basis of Design for the drainage layer (Section 9.5) and identified in Task 3 of the PWS (Section 6.3).

33. Question: For the seed task, General Note #6 on drawing 2 mentions tank storage and off-site disposal of surface water; however, the PWS instructs the contractor to use the bioreactor. Please clarify this and any other discrepancies between the drawings and the PWS. Should the PWS be followed if there is a discrepancy?

Response: Per the Performance Standards provided in Table 1, all water recovered from within the Tailing Impoundment shall be treated to achieve Ambient Water Quality Standards prior to discharge. During significant storm events, it is anticipated that the capacity of the bio-reactor treatment system may be exceeded and the offeror will be required to provide alternative holing storage until the treatment system can handle the flow.

Additional discrepancies should be identified for resolution by USACE.

34. Question: Is it acceptable for decontamination water to be processed and treated via the bioreactor treatment system or shall all decontamination water be containerized, characterized, and properly disposed offsite?

Response: See response to Question #33

35. Question: Performance Work Statement, Contract Procurement Objectives & Overview, states the contractor shall comply with, among other documents, the OU3 Final Remedial Design, AMEC Environmental. If conflicts in scope are encountered between documents, does the Performance Work Statement prevail?

Response: Discrepancies/conflicts between documents shall immediately be brought to the attention of USACE for resolution.

36. Question: For establishment of the quarry within the seed task, is permitting required for this work? Is a pre and post seismic survey and monitoring required?

Response: Remedial response actions at Federal Superfund Sites do not require permits.

However, Title 38: Waters and Navigation, Chapter 3, Subchapter 1, Article 8-A of the Maine Revised Statutes has been approved as an Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement for the remedial response actions at the site. As such, quarry design, operations, and restoration must be in substantive compliance with this law. Per the PWS (Task 4), a pre and post survey are required.

37. Question: Please clarify if the seed task order scope includes restoration of the quarry or if this left open for future task orders?

Response: The Quarry Design and Restoration Plan must include the proposed restoration approach. The quarry will be left open at the end of this Seed Task Order, but the condition must be no more hazardous than present.

38. Question: Please clarify the requirements for the PPQs to be returned in a sealed envelope (Factor 4). If the client prefers to email back a completed form to us vs. hard copy mailing, should this be placed into an envelope for our submittal or can we provide a copy of the client email showing submittal to us?

Response: Please submit the PPQs in a sealed envelope together with the offer. Do not submit client emails containing PPQ’s.

39. Question: Please clarify if an intro or summary of firm resources can be included as part of

Factor 2 within the 25 page limit? It would be to the benefit of the government to understand our resources and qualification other than 5 people.

Response: Factor 2 is limited to the resumes of the 5 key personnel (25 page limit).

40. Question: Is there a percent threshold for a teaming member / subcontractor to require submittal of a project in Factor 1? For example if a team member is only performing a portion of work and not the majority or all of one of the key work functions listed, is a project for this subcontractor required?

Response: Please see Solicitation Amendment 0005 for clarification regarding Team Experience submission requirements (Question Response #5 and Solicitation Revision).

41. Question: Where should the proposal adequacy checklist be located within the proposal?

Response: The proposal adequacy checklist should be included with the cost section in Volume II, Factor 6, Section 3.

42. Question: Performance Work Statement, Task 2.2 indicates that the Work Plan shall include an Air Monitoring Program. Task 8 indicates that the Completion Report shall include air monitoring results. However, specification section 01 56 00, Section 1.01C indicates that “On-site and/or perimeter air monitoring via respirable dust meters will be performed by others.” Is the contractor responsible for developing and/or implementing a perimeter and/or on-site air monitoring program?

Response: Yes, the offeror is responsible for developing and implementing a perimeter and on-site monitoring program.

43. Question: Performance Work Statement, Task 2.4. This task requires that the contractor prepare a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) that shall be consistent with the SAP dated 21 July 2015 developed by the State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection. Please provide this referenced document.

Response: The Sampling and Analysis Plan dated 29 November 2016 was provided in Amendment 7. The PWS has been revised to reflect the most current SAP dated 29 November 2016.

44. Question: Please provide a copy of the most recent Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP).

Response: See response to Comment #43, above.

45. Question: Performance Work Statement, Task 10. This task requires that the contractor perform operation and maintenance of the on-site bio-reactor treatment system in accordance with the SAP/QAPP, Callahan Mine Superfund Site, Operable Unit 3, - TP-1 Performance Assessment, Brooksville, ME, dated November 29, 2016. Please provide this referenced document.

Response: See response to Comment #43.

46. Question: Performance Work Statement, Task 9. Please provide the required frequency and duration (ie. monthly for a 12 month duration) for groundwater monitoring of the 24 wells.

Response: Sampling of the wells is required annually. Assume two rounds of sampling and analysis under this 18 month Seed Task Order.

47. Question: Performance Work Statement, Task 10. This task indicates that “The operation and maintenance activities shall include monthly site inspections, influent and effluent monitoring, flow monitoring, groundwater elevation monitoring, and trouble-shooting of the system.” Please provide the required frequency and duration (ie. monthly for a 12 month duration) for each of the tasks indicated above.

Response: All tasks identified above are required monthly for the 18 month duration of the Seed Task Order Period of Performance.

48. Question: Performance Work Statement, Task 10. This task indicates that “Water quality monitoring will be conducted at four locations: discharge structure influent, bioreactor influent, aeration ditch effluent, and combined flow from both aeration ditch and stormwater ditch”. Please provide the frequency and duration (ie. monthly for a 12 month duration) for the water quality monitoring.

Response: All tasks identified above are required monthly for the 18 month duration of the Seed Task Order Period of Performance.

49. Question: Performance Work Statement, Section 5.0, Table 1 – Performance Requirements

Summary. Tasks 2.1 through 2.7 indicate the required Plans. There is no mention of the requirement for an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in the Performance Work Statement. However, specification section 31 25 00 of the OU3 Final Remedial Design, dated 1 July 2015, indicates that an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is required. Is an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan required for the seed task order?

Response: The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan should be submitted as part of the Work Plan (Task 2.2) to be submitted within 90 days of Notice to Proceed. Erosion and Sedimentation controls shall be costed under Task 3 – Site Mobilization and Site Preparation.

50. Question: Performance Work Statement, Section 5.0, Table 1 – Performance Requirements

Summary. Tasks 2.1 through 2.7 indicate the required Plans. There is no mention of the requirement for a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan in the Performance Work Statement.

Is a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required for the seed task order?

Response: The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan should be submitted as part of the Work Plan (Task 2.2). Stormwater pollution prevention controls shall be costed under Task 3 – Site Mobilization and Site Preparation.

Question: Performance Work Statement, General. The PWS does not include a task(s) for seed project restoration requirements. Please provide seed project restoration performance objectives and standards for all of the areas that will be impacted by seed project construction activities (ie. quarry area, tailings impoundment, tailings dam, support area, operations/staging areas).

Response: The Seed Task Order is the initial stage in the remediation of the Tailing Impoundment. Site restoration will be addressed in a subsequent Task Order. The Quarry Design and Restoration Plan shall include the restoration approach for the quarry.

51. Question: General. Is the quarry area planned for future use on subsequent task orders? If so, what is required as part of the seed project for temporarily securing, restoring, and stabilizing the quarry area following completion of seed project quarry operations?

Response: There may be future use of the quarry on subsequent task orders. The Quarry Design and Restoration Plan shall include measures that will be implemented to secure the quarry until subsequent task orders are implemented. Pricing for the measures to be implemented to secure the quarry shall be included in Task 4.

52. Question: Performance Work Statement, Task 4, Table 2 provides estimated volumes of aggregate materials that are necessary to complete the tailings impoundment remedy. The OU3 Final Remedial Design, Specification Section 31 23 00 provides specifications for all of the aggregate types except the estimated 25,000 CY of aggregate necessary for refacing the dam. Please provide specifications for the 25,000 CY of material required to reface the dam.

Response: The offeror shall specify stone protection or rip rap sufficient to provide a stable 2H:1V slope for static and dynamic loadings consistent with USACE engineering manual EM 1110-2-1902 and the EPA FMEA.

53. Question: Binding Rates – Labor. Craft labor resources will be utilized for completion of the Seed Task scope of work. As such, are they required to be added to the Binding Rates table?

Response: Binding Rates must be provided for all work described in Factor 3 & 4 in accordance with Solicitation Factor 6, Section 7 and Attachment H.

54. Question: Binding Rates – Equipment. Offerors are to include “Binding rates for equipment shall be included regardless of the decision to buy, lease, rent, and/or depreciate the equipment.” Will rates for Rented Equipment be Binding during the period of the contract, or are Binding Rates only applicable to Contractor/Subcontractor owned equipment?

Response: During the period of the contact, Binding rates for equipment (with proposed escalation) are applicable regardless of whether equipment is owned, leased, rented or depreciated.

55. Question: Binding Rates. Offerors are to assume that Binding Rates and Seed Task costs occur within Year 1 of the contract. Please confirm binding rates will be escalated / adjusted following Year 1 of the contract?

Response: See Solicitation, Section L – Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders, Factor 6 – Cost and Price – Submission Requirements, viii. Section 8: Escalation.

56. Question: Are Binding rates only applicable to Fixed Price Tasks / Task Orders?

Response: Binding rates are applicable to all tasks.

57. Question: For subcontractor rate build-up, is it acceptable for this information to be submitted in a sealed envelope by the subcontractor with the prime's proposal submission?

Response: Yes. The subcontractor rate build up information, as required in Attachment I-2, can be submitted in a sealed envelope (both electronic CD and paper formats required).

58. Question: Please confirm Subcontractors can submit “Solicitation_Attachment_I-2-

_Subcontractor_Binding_Rates” and associated supporting rate development narrative within a separate sealed envelope to the Prime Contractor’s proposal.

Response: See Response to Questions #57.

59. Question: Attachment G – Seed Task Order, Section 6.4 – Task 4 Establish On-Site Quarry, Table 2 – On-Site Quarry Summary:

a. Please describe where the quantities identified in the summary table (Working/Drainage Surface 27,000 CY; Crushed Access Road Gravel 3,000 CY; Underdrain Gravel 15,000 CY;

and Reface Dam 25,000 CY) were expected to be used by the Contractor.

Response: Working/drainage surface (27,000 CY), crushed access road gravel (3,000 CY), and underdrain gravel (15,000 CY) should be included in the Site Preparation Task (Task 3).

Refacing the dam (25,000 CY) should be included in the Reduce Height of Tailing Impoundment Dam Task (Task 5).

b. To assist contractors in evaluating and pricing the work properly, please describe the governments’ assumptions used to arrive at each item of the quantities presented.

Response: The Seed Task Order PWS specifies the quantities for this Firm Fixed Price task.

The assumptions made in developing the quantities are not necessary for pricing the required work.

60. Question: AMEC Drawing C-305 and Attachment G, Page 15 indicates that tailings shall be placed on top of the impoundment area in 2 lifts. Note 2 on Section D of Sheet C-305 of the Amec Drawings indicates that the tailings shall be placed 2 foot lifts that shall remain in place for 2 to 4 weeks.

Please clarify if the 2 to 4 week waiting period is to apply to a 4 foot lift or a 2 foot lift.

Response: The actual waiting period between lifts will be determined by the achievement of the 90% consolidation. In order to be conservative, assume 90 days for consolidation between lifts (as stated in Table 1 of the PWS). For the purposes of the estimate, assume two lifts for the placement of the excavated material (five feet of material total).

61. Question: Attachment G, Section 6.7, Page 16, “Task 7 Regrade Tailings Material and Construct Drainage

Swale” states in part… “The decant pipe shall be sealed to prevent water intrusion and potential weakening of the tailing impoundment.”

a. Please provide the location and depth below existing grade of the upstream/west end of the 6-inch cast iron decant pipe.

Response: The western end of the cast iron decant pipe is at the surface. The location is indicated in Figure

4.2.6 of the Remedial Investigation Report (www.epa.gov/superfund/callahan).

b. Is capping of the pipe at the west end sufficient? If not, please describe sealing procedures the government desires?

Response: The pipe should be filled with flowable fill or grout to prevent water intrusion/extrusion throughout its length.

62. Question: Cost and Price Form I-2. Prime fees on subcontractor cost and price. Does the Prime contractor apply fee on Form I-2? If not, please confirm that Prime fees on subcontractor cost and price will be calculated, negotiated, and applied at the Task Order Level.

Response: Fee and profit will be negotiated at the task order level. Please see solicitation Factor 6 item ix. Section 9: Fee for more details. Fee and profit should be proposed for the Sample Task Order on Attachments I-4 and I-5.

63. Reference: Cost and Price Form I-5 Summary Sheet.

Question: Please confirm that the summary sheet on price form I-5 is to be used by the prime contractor to apply proposed fee on the seed task order.

Response: Attachment I-5 is to be used by the subcontractors to apply their proposed fee on the seed task order. The prime contractor is to use Attachment I-4 to apply their fee on the seed task order.

64. Question: Where does the Prime contractor capture markups for General & Administrative costs on Purchase Order Subcontractors, ODCs, and Travel? Offeror recommends modifying the summary tables on price forms I-4 and I-5 to add columns to apply G&A to these costs.

Response: Please see response to Question 23 on Amendment 0007.

65. Question: On Cost and Price Forms I-2 and I-5, where do subcontractors capture markups for General & Administrative costs on Purchase Order Subcontractors, ODCs, and Travel?

Response: Please see response to Question 23 on Amendment 0007. Please note that Form I-2 does not have tabs for Subcontractors, ODC, and Travel. Rates for labor and equipment in form I-2 should be fully burdened with all mark-ups.

66. Question: Under Factor 4d (RFP, page 91), the MIS capabilities discussion requires us to describe “tracking” capabilities…can you provide additional insights as to the type of tracking you would like us to describe?

Response: Identify any systems that you use to track progress and performance in completing the project.

67. Question: Factor 4c (RFP page 91) requires us to discuss “how the Offeror will ensure quality consistently across the team.” Factor 4e requires us to discuss the offeror’s “planned approach to quality control….” Can you provide further clarification as to how these two requirements differ?

Response: Factor 4c of the Solicitation has been revised to clarify that “across the team” includes all subcontractors. Factor 4e of the Solicitation has been revised to delete "quality control".

68. Question: Section L, Page 87 indicates that Letters of Commitment submitted for Factor 4 will not be counted toward page limit. Section M (page 98) under Factor 4 indicates that Letters of Commitment under Factor 1 will be considered during evaluation of Factor 4. Can you please clarify which section we are to include the Letters in, Factor 1 or 4, or both?

Response: See Amendment 0007, RFI #4, Question and Response #6

69. Question: Seed Task Order PWS, Section 6.5 states that waste rock removed from the tailings impoundment perimeter berms “shall be transported to the on-site quarry area located along the west side of the former mining operations.” Note that berm rock is not required to be crushed for use as aggregate on the tailings impoundment surface. If tailing impoundment perimeter berm material is not going to be crushed and used on the tailings impoundment, is it required to be transported to the on-site quarry area?

Response: It is anticipated that all stone from the berm will need to be sorted, however, the sorting does not necessarily need to be done at the quarry. Berm rock that is oversized (greater than 12” in diameter) will require processing at the quarry prior to placement. The PWS has been revised to clarify the requirements for placement of berm rock.

70. Question: Reference: Seed Task Order PWS, Section 6.5 appears to have a typo in the second paragraph where it states that excavated tailings material shall be placed on the tailings impoundment east of the swale excavation. Note that the swale excavation is located along the top of the dam, and the east side of the tailings impoundment is Goose Pond.

Question: Please confirm that excavated tailings material should be placed west of the swale excavation.

Response: The excavated tailings material will be placed to the west of the swale excavation. Section 6.7 (not 6.5) has been be revised in the PWS.

71. Question: Section B, Bullet 8 requires a statement regarding conflict of interest if the offeror has had prior experience on the site, as well as a plan to avoid, minimize or mitigate the conflict. It also says that such a plan would be considered part of the offeror’s proposal.

Please confirm that this plan can be included in the Cost/Price Volume, and is not subject to the page restrictions of Volume 1.

Response: Potential Conflict of Interest information should be included in Volume II: Cost and Price.

72. Question: Seed Task Order, Section 6.5 (Task 5 - Reduce Height of Tailings Impoundment

Dam). This task indicates that the “contractor will be required to demonstrate in the Work Plan that their proposed approach achieves the required slope stability Factors of Safety.”

Please clarify that the Work Plan and corresponding demonstration that the proposed approach achieves the required slope stability Factors of Safety is referring to the EPA FMEA to be conducted as part of the Work Plan development under Task 2.2 (Work Plan).

Response: The slope stability factors of safety must be demonstrated in accordance with USACE Engineering Manual EM 1110-2-1902 independently of the EPA FMEA. The EPA FMEA is a separate document with a purpose to identify potential failure modes associated with the implementation of the Seed Task Order along with associated mitigation and best practice measure. The PWS requirement to achieve the slope stability Factor of Safety is a fundamental requirement of the Seed Task Order and a measure of success. In cases where the EM and FMEA have conflicting requirements, the more stringent factor of safety shall be applied. EPA has issued a document entitled “Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled, Fluid Mining Waste Releases” dated July 2017 which provides guidance on conducting Failure Modes and Effects Analysis which is provided as an attachment to this Amendment.

73. Question: Seed Project, Task 2 Prepare Plans: If the contractor, as part of the Work Plan development, will prepare revised and stamped construction documents that formalize the USACE design refinement (i.e. Attachment G), who will be the Design Engineer of Record?

Response: The awardee will be the Design Engineer of Record. The awardee is responsible for providing all plans and specifications together with the Seed Task Order Work Plan within 90 days of Notice to Proceed. Plans and specifications that are taken directly from the BOD (without revision) can be referenced instead of re-submitted. In the Work Plan submittal, the awardee must demonstrate that the entire submitted design meets the performance standards specified in the PWS. The design work demonstrating compliance with the performance standards must be signed and stamped by a Professional Engineer. The Seed Task Order PWS has been revised to clarify that all plans and specifications shall be submitted with the Seed Task Order Work Plan, and that design work demonstrating compliance with the performance standards must be signed and stamped by a Professional Engineer.

SOLICITATION AMENDMENTS

All revisions are shown in red.

The sixth paragraph on page 95 of 118 of the Solicitation is deleted and replaced with the following:

“All ODC charges, including utilities and fuel costs, should be included for all parties performing work under the Seed Task Order.”

Paragraph 4c on page 91 of 118 of the Solicitation is revised as follows:

“c. Discuss how the Offeror will ensure quality consistently across the team, including all subcontractors. Discuss quality control lines of authority between Team Members.”

“quality control” is deleted from Paragraph 4e on page 91 of 118 of the Solicitation as follows:

“e. Describe management for performance of the contract including Offeror’s planned approach to: quality control, staffing, and obtaining, retaining, coordinating, and managing subcontractors.”

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 20-Sep-2017 12:00 PM to 10-Oct-2017 12:00 PM.

(End of Summary of Changes)