12445125R0002 Questions Asked 06302025 REV6.doc

COMMENTS MATRIX FOR USDA-FS ISSUANCES: 12445125R0002 GWJ VCT Design-Build Rehab PHASE I (Please read instructions on back before completing form.)

See Amendment 0001/ NEW Attachment 02, 07, and 08

*Return the SF-30 acknowledgement with your Phase I submittal

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 01, Schedule B – Please confirm, or otherwise clarify, that the work must be broken down into four (4) ‘segments’ (mm 00 to 05, mm 5 to 10, mm 10 to 15, and mm 15 to 20) and five (5) main components (debris/cleanup/demolition – bridge and trails, design of bridges, design of trails, construction of bridges, construction of trails) as identified or if the perspective DB Team can propose alternative ‘segments’ and main components.

Resolution: Schedule B is not utilized in Phase 1. In Phase 2, page 27 of the RFP, Section K, FAR 52.204 – 22 allows for alternative line-item proposals.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 01, Schedule B – While a clarifying note is provided below the tables, it does not indicate which of the five (5) main components shall contain environmental permitting activities. Please clarify which of the five (5) main components shall contain environmental permitting activities.

Resolution: Cost of permitting will be allocated to the component that it supports. Permitting will span multiple line items and should be initiated during the early phases of design, for bridges and trail, 30%. For debris removal - when the conceptual of what needs to occur is drafted.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 01, Schedule B – Please confirm, or otherwise clarify, that environmental permits are not required to conduct debris cleanup and demolition.

Resolution: Permits may be required depending on the contractor’s proposal to include temporary access, structures or the need for ground disturbance or in stream work to convey debris removal / demolition.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, Background and Location – Please identify the relevant Forest Service Handbook series that provides the specific processes to determine the final trail alignment.

Resolution: Forest Service Handbook 2309.18 Trails Management Handbook has been provided in the Technical Library.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, Background and Location – In order to evaluate to overall program, please confirm, or otherwise clarify, that the DB Team, following the processes outlined in the Forest Service Handbook as well as the established design criteria, will determine the final trail alignment.

Resolution: Yes – the DB team will provide forward the final trail alignment in accordance with Forest Service design parameters, contract sideboards and within easement parameters.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, Background and Location – In order to evaluate the overall program, please confirm, or otherwise clarify, that boundary surveys and railroad corridor locations are to be mark in the field only (e.g. they shall not be incorporated into the submissions). If they are to be incorporated into the submissions, please clarify which submission (30%, 85%, 100%) shall contain the information.

Resolution: Must be marked in the field and shown on the appropriate plan sheet at the 85% and 100% submissions.

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, Design-Build Scope of Objectives – In order to evaluate the overall program, please clarify which existing trees (size, type, etc.) shall be surveyed for type, size, condition, and location within the entire limits of disturbance. Specifically, the perspective DB Team is trying to ascertain if all trees or only certain trees within the entire limits of disturbance need to be surveyed.

Resolution: The DB team will need to quantify the number of trees that need to be removed within the alignment to facilitate demolition, construction and new trail locations. All trees within the limits of disturbance that are proposed for removal need to be documented, regardless of size or species.

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, Design-Build Scope of Objectives – Please clarify which submission (30%, 85%, 100%) shall contain the tree survey.

Resolution: This should be provided between the 85% - 100% submittals as the construction limits will be defined on the plan sets by that stage.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, Design-Build Scope of Objectives – Geotechnical Requirements indicate to provide supplemental subsurface investigation and characterization, does the Government possess any preliminary geotechnical information and if so, can that be provided?

Resolution: At this time no geotechnical data has been collected, although previous bridge inspection reports may have useful data for the DB team to utilize. These will be provided with the Supplemental Information documents as part of the appendices.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Part B, Trail Design Parameters – Please clarify the process to be utilized to determine that a particular structure does/does not meet a 25-year design life.

Resolution: Creation of a specific plan for cataloguing and Inspecting Drainage Pipes on the Virginia Creeper Trail will be the responsibility of the contractor. A list of the known culverts (pre-storm) is listed in Section C. Other culverts that may have not been previously catalogued may exist. An example program for cataloguing, inspecting and rating drainage pipes on the Virginia Creeper Trail will be supplied on the project. The contractor’s plan should be of similar scope to that document. The contractor shall submit findings of those investigations to the USFS contracting officer for final determination of acceptance by the project team.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Part B, Trail Design Parameters – In order to evaluate the overall program, please clarify what entity, the Government or the DB Team, will determine that a particular structure does/does not meet a 25-year design life.

Resolution: An example scope that could be referenced to outline how the design life of each culvert or drainage structure has been provided as supplemental information in the technical library. This is not an exact requirement and is for reference only.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Part C, Hydraulic Design Parameters – Please clarify the process to be utilized to determine that a particular hydrologic analysis is/is not required.

Resolution: There only hydrologic analysis necessary will be the computation of the design flood flow for each bridge location. Each bridge design shall pass a flood flow with an annual exceedance probability of 1% (i.e., a 100-year recurrence interval flood). This may be different for each bridge if there is tributary inflow between subsequent bridge locations.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Part C, Hydraulic Design Parameters – In order to evaluate the overall program, please clarify what entity, the Government or the DB Team, will determine that a particular hydrologic analysis is/is not required.

Resolution: Hydrologic analysis of design flood flow is required for each bridge location. The DB Team will determine if additional hydrologic analyses are necessary to support hydraulic analyses.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, 210.1 Designs – Please confirm, or otherwise clarify, that bridge type, size, and location (TS&L) plans are required, which appears to be described in Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, 210.3 Preliminary Designs.

Resolution: 30% design submittals to include the bridge type, size and location plans.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, 210.2 Project Formatting – Please confirm, or otherwise clarify, that Microstation OpenRoads, and more generally *.dgn file format, is an acceptable design software.

Resolution: The use of industry-standard design software is acceptable. However, submittals and deliverables are required to be in *.dwg file format so that the files are accessible for use by Forest Service personnel.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 02, Section C, Description/Specifications/Statement of Objective, 210.5 Submittals – In order to evaluate the overall program, please provide the government review durations for 30%, 85%, and 100% submittals.

Resolution: The Forest Service will require 10 business days to review each of the 30%, 85%, and 100% submittals. Batched submittals of each design phase will be required.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07, Section 2.0, Procurement Overview, Part B.2 Phase II Request for Proposal (RFP) – In order to evaluate the overall program, given the available timeframe during Phase II as well as the investigation, survey, analysis, and design processes potentially needed for a “complete design solution,” please describe/list in detail what is necessary to address the statement “The technical proposal requires a complete design solution to satisfy the requirement of the RFP.”. Specifically, the perspective DB Team is trying to understand the exact elements that constitute a “complete design solution”.

Resolution: A ‘complete design solution’ includes all of the elements described in Attachment 02, Section C.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07, L.1 Provisions, Bid Guarantee – Please clarify when the bid guarantee is to be submitted (with Phase 1 or Phase 2).

Resolution: Guarantee is required in PHASE II.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07, Section 2.0, Procurement Overview – Please clarify when the Small Business Subcontracting Plan is to be submitted (with Phase 1 or Phase 2)

Resolution: Phase II; Factor 5

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07, Section 2.4, Part F – Please consider removing the Section 508 compliance for the Phase I Call for Qualifications Resolution: This requirement cannot be removed. Section 508 compliance is required for all public facing documents, including PDFs, that are posted to a site, distributed across the agency, or used as a sole means of information. To ensure that a PDF is accessible, both the content and the backend structure must be free from issues that would alter or block information to users with disabilities. More information can be found here: https://www.section508.gov/create/pdfs/

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 08, multiple sections – In order to evaluate the overall program, please describe how the Government established that the completion of field investigations, survey, analysis, design, permitting, and construction of $200M-$300M worth of infrastructure can be completed within the Period of Performance (10/01/2025 to 09/30/2026). The anticipated timeframe results in a productivity rate of approximately $650K per day and more importantly does not appear to account for appropriate timeframes necessary to complete the stated scope of work. For example, upon debris removal and obtaining access, survey, investigations, establishment of the trail alignment, geotechnical exploration, testing, reporting, and engineering; hydraulic analysis; 30%, 85%, and 100% design preparation; submission; and review along with necessary permitting will utilize most, if not all, of the Period of Performance. Certain initial construction efforts could potentially occur during this period, after debris clean-up; however, major infrastructure construction could not begin until after plan approval and permit acquisition, even while considering advanced construction packages. Please consider extending the Period of Performance from 12 months to 36 months, which provides a more realistic timeframe to complete the stated scope of work, or relax/reduce/modify the stated scope of work to ensure the project can be completed within the currently identified Period of Performance.

Resolution: Period for performance is stated in Section M and L. The Forest Service requires completion by 09/30/2026, as stated in the RFQ. The Forest Service will consider proposals with alternative schedules meeting this requirement.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 08, Section IV, Part 2 Contractor Subfactor Submittal – Experience – The contractor requirement for five (5) relevant construction projects valued at $200M or more within the past seven (7) years as this requirement is onerous and limiting in terms of smaller qualified contractors. Please consider adjusting the contractor requirement to construction projects valued at $35M or more within the past ten (10) years, inclusive of active projects.

Resolution: Construction unchanged. Concur. Decreased to $10M for AE. See Section M Update

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 08, Phase II, Part 4 Contractor Submittal Evaluation Factor 4 Project Management – Typically the Design-Build Project Manager (DBPM) is an employee of the Contractor, not the Architect-Engineering Group. Please consider adjusting the DBPM to be an employee of the Contractor.

Resolution: Concur. See Section M. Position can be on either Construction or AE at the prime contractor’s discretion.

Email 6/2/2025

Bidder Comment: DB Solicitation Summary – Please consider extending the Phase I Call for Qualification deadline to July 18, 2025.

Resolution: See amendment 001

Pre-Proposal Conference #1 06/02/2025

Bidder Comment: Our team is very concerned about the short duration of Phase II; approximately six weeks to prepare our design and bid with the limited site information that has been provided. Will survey and geotechnical information be provided to the shortlisted proposers? Without this information there will be considerable quantity risk that could prevent our team from participating in the pursuit unless the USFS shares in this risk or more time is given to account for the collection of this information during the pursuit.

Resolution: There is no survey and geotechnical information available, aside from minor information available in past bridge inspections which is now provided in the supplemental information documents. All surveying will be the responsibility of the Design-Build Contractor and will be conducted as required by Forest Service regulations and state requirements (Attachment 02, Section C, page 30). The Contractor will be required to conduct subsurface explorations and prepare a report of geotechnical recommendations (Attachment 02, Section C, page 31).

Pre-Proposal Conference #1 06/02/2025

Bidder Comment: One year to design, fabricate, and deliver a $200-$300 million project is not possible. Time will be needed on the front end for the Lidar surveys and geotechnical investigations. Conventional surveys will be required to create the HEC-RAS models for most of the bridge replacement sites. Structural evaluations along with reports and mitigation plans will need to be approved by the USFS before plans can be fully developed. Each structure will require the preparation of three plan submittals (30%, 85% and 100%) and review and comment resolution for each submittal. Time will be needed for the fabrication of beams/trusses after plan approval. All of these activities could easily take a year to complete leaving no time for construction. Although the RFP does allow the contractor the ability to submit an alternate schedule it also states that this schedule could be grounds for rejection of the contractor’s Phase II submittal Resolution: Period for performance is stated in Section M and L.

Pre-Proposal Conference #1 06/02/2025

Bidder Comment: Are you able to provide the LIDAR data and the 1-D HEC-RAS models for Whitetop Laurel Creek, Green Cove Creek and Burgess Creek referenced in Attachment 2 so we can assess how much more effort it will take to develop the technical proposal and cost? The current stipend is not enough to cover the cost to collect the necessary data to prepare our proposal and perform the preliminary design needed to develop quantities for the project.

Resolution: Existing, pre-Helene LiDAR data is available in the technical library per request. The reference to the 1-D HEC-RAS models has been struck from Attachment 2.

Pre-Proposal Conference #1 06/02/2025

Bidder Comment: Will any additional mapping, survey, or digital base files (e.g., LiDAR, alignment shapefiles) be made available to shortlisted teams in Phase II?

Resolution: Existing, pre-Helene LiDAR data is available in the technical library per request.

Pre-Proposal Conference #1 06/02/2025

Bidder Comment: Will permitting be handled through emergency procedures? The traditional permitting process alone introduces significant risk to the project.

Resolution: Yes – as much as legally possible and under the authority provided by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) and the Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) during the required Joint Permit Application (JPA) process to obtain Section 404 permitting.

Email 06/04/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07, Section 2.2 Notice to Offerors, Pre-Proposal Conference Number Two – Please consider the participation of Government technical personnel in Pre-Proposal Conference 2 based on the number of potential Offeror(s) technical questions that need to be resolved as part of the Offeror’s decision-making process, and the remaining timeframe to submit. The participation of Government technical personnel in Pre-Proposal Conference Number Two can ensure that critical items affecting an Offeror’s ability to submit can be addressed in the pre-proposal conference.

Resolution: USFS will be available if required. Questions entered into the Teams meeting Chat are reflected in this Q&A distributed to all potential bidders.

Email 06/04/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07, Section 2.2, Part K.2.b - Indicates that for an unsuccessful Offeror to be eligible to receive the full stipend, the Phase I Call for Qualification proposal shall conform to all RFP requirements and contain no material deficiencies or omissions. Attachment 08, Section IV, Part 1 – Indicates that, among other things, the Offeror shall describe the rationale for proposing the arrangement to meet the 30 September 2026 deadline and the screening criteria indicates that the Offeror’s technical approach will be evaluated subjectively. Please confirm, or otherwise clarify, that if the 30 September 2026 deadline is not proposed in the Offeror’s Phase I Call for Qualification proposal, the Offeror’s proposal will not contain a material deficiency or omission. Please clarify if the Offeror’s technical approach subjective scoring may be rated lower if the 30 September 2026 deadline is not proposed and the Offeror’s proposal will not be considered to contain a material deficiency or omission. If the Offeror’s subjective scoring will be rated lower if the 30 September 2026 deadline is not proposed, please describe in detail how the subjective scoring will be rated Resolution: Unchanged. Per Section M, Page 6 of 18 Phase I: - Submissions that demonstrate an ability to meet the completion date of 30 Sep 2026, may be considered more favorably than those that reflect an alternative date of completion.

Page 11 of 18 Phase II: A design and technical solution that supports a delivery date of 30 SEP 2026 is most the important Evaluation Factor. The government required completion date is 30 SEP 2026. The contractor’s draft schedule may reflect an alternative date for consideration by the government, but that schedule “may” impact overall Phase I consideration

Page 12 of 18: A technical solution that demonstrates an understanding of the requirements and the opportunities to achieve the 30 Sep 2026 deadline through innovation means and methods

Email 06/04/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07, Section 2.0, Part B.1 – Indicates that the Phase I Call for Qualifications shall only involve non-price criteria and shall not include either design or pricing information. Attachment 07, Section 2.3, Part E – Indicates that Offeror’s shall not include assumptions with any part of their submission. Attachment 08, Section IV, Part 3 – indicates that the Offeror’s proposal shall provide a concept overview that addresses, among other things, an overarching schedule that demonstrates executing the overall requirements in the draft RFP where the project completion end date is 30 September 2026.

While it is understood that the Offeror’s proposal shall only contain/provide non-price criteria and shall not include design or price information, please describe how the Offeror’s schedule will be considered valid in terms of capability and capacity and not be considered an assumption, given that the Offeror’s schedule would be prepared without advancing design or pricing as part of the Phase I Call for Qualifications. A project schedule is built from informed activities, logic, and durations related to design, permitting processes, and construction as developed during Phase II Request for Proposal Response. Please consider removing the schedule as a screening criteria and/or evaluation factor with the Phase I Call for Qualifications proposal as the Offeror’s schedule will not have been properly examined/prepared with respect to relevant/necessary design, permitting, and construction processes and would include various assumptions across numerous project elements Resolution: Unchanged. See Section M, page 6 of 18

Phase I:

The Design-Build firm will be able to successfully integrate Design with Construction to meet a deadline of 30 Sep 2026. The DB firm should provide a concept overview for the execution of the VCT RFP should it be awarded to them. The concept overview should address:

- Provide a layout Overview of Project: schedule; personnel; Control costs; Finance work; Estimate jobs; Schedule the work; Manage cash flow; Manage an effective safety program; Maintain an effective quality control system

- Submittal of overarching schedule/Gantt chart or equivalent that demonstrates executing the overall requirements in the draft RFP. The project completion end date is 30 Sep 2026.

Email 06/04/2025

Bidder Comment: FAR 52.211-12 Liquidate Damages – Indicates that if the Contractor fails to complete the work within the time specified in the contract, liquidated damages in the amount of $1,000 for each calendar day will be paid to the government. Please consider that $1,000 for each calendar day, relevant to the size of the overall project, may not be sufficient to deter an Offeror ‘absorbing’ the liquidated damages as part of their overall proposal. Past experience indicates that the liquidated damage amount should be 5 to 10 times higher than the $1,000 per day for a project of this magnitude.

Resolution: Liquidated damages (LD) are not a punitive measure and are a means to reimburse the government for direct loss due to completion delays. In 12445125R0002, that amount is $1,000 per day.

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 08 - Section M – IV.2 “Contractors Experience” – This section requests projects valued at $200M or more involving new construction or renovation of bridges and trails completed in the past 7 years. Trail projects that exceed $200M are extremely rare. Additionally, the 7-year timeframe is extremely short for this type of qualification request. Can this requirement be modified to include both projects with relevant work elements that exceed $200M as well as projects that are specific to trail and bridge reconstruction that exceed $10M and the time requirement be modified to projects that are at least 50% complete within the last 15 years to better showcase the offerors experience?

Resolution: Construction unchanged. Concur. Decreased to $10M for AE. See Section M Update

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 08 - Section M – IV.2 “Design Experience” – This section requests designer experience on projects valued at $35M or more. Please confirm that this $35M is the construction value of a project and not the design value.

Resolution: Concur. Decreased to $10M. See Section M Update

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 08 - Section M – IV.2 “Government Standard Screening Criteria” – The fourth bullet in this section states “Relevant projects that demonstrate experience with laboratory construction and/or renovation experience may be considered more favorable than those that do not have laboratory construction experience.” It is unclear why laboratory experience would be relevant to this project. Please clarify.

Resolution: Deleted. See Revised Attachment 08 - Section M Evaluations Factors

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 08 – Section M – Phase II General Submission Requirements #4 – This section lists key roles that will be required to be shown during the proposal stage. The “Design-Build Project Manager (DBPM)” is listed under the “Architect-Engineer Group.” Typically this position would fall under the construction group as they are part of the contractors organization and not the designers organization. Please revise this section to show the DBPM under the Construction Group.

Resolution: Concur. See Section M. Position can be on either Construction or AE at the prime contractor’s discretion.

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Subcontracting goals: Our team strongly supports small business participation and has consistently partnered with reliable small business firms across numerous projects. However, the proposed 40% subcontracting requirement is not practical for a project of this size, complexity, and aggressive schedule. We recommend adjusting the subcontracting goal to 20%. Similarly, the 58% small business (SB) procurement target appears overly ambitious; a revised target of 43% would be more attainable while still ensuring meaningful small business engagement.

Resolution: No changes to the contractor requirements at this time.

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Procurement timeline: We recognize the urgency associated with this fast-tracked project, but respectfully recommend extending the procurement timeline to allow for more comprehensive proposals and reduced risk premiums. Specifically, we suggest extending Phase 1 to August 9 and Phase 2 to December 29. Additional time would improve proposal quality by allowing teams to better understand design details, permitting requirements, and procurement constraints.

Resolution: No changes to the contractor requirements at this time.

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Project timeline: Completing design, permitting, and full construction within a single year is not feasible for a project of this scope—particularly given the absence of bridging documents and existing survey data. To ensure a realistic and achievable delivery schedule, we recommend incorporating a phased approach with clear milestones for design, permitting, and procurement. We encourage the USFS to either adopt a progressive design-build procurement method or extend the project completion date to September 30, 2027. This would allow for a more deliberate process while still enabling early delivery through performance incentives. To support accountability, we also recommend implementing early completion incentives and increasing LDs so they are proportionate to the project’s total installed cost, ensuring meaningful alignment between risk and schedule performance.

Resolution: Period for performance is stated in Section M and L. The Forest Service requires completion by 09/30/2026, as stated in the RFQ. The Forest Service will consider proposals with alternative schedules meeting this requirement. LDs are not a punitive measure and are a means to reimburse the government for direct loss due to completion delays. In 12445125R0002, that amount is $1,000 per day.

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Request relief on the past performance requirements: Given the highly unique nature of this project—a large-scale reconstruction of a recreational trail unlike most efforts in recent history—we respectfully request flexibility in the interpretation of past performance criteria. While our team brings deep experience with recreational trail projects, USFS work, and alternative delivery methods, it may be difficult to align specific personnel with projects exceeding $100 million in contract value, especially if the qualifications are interpreted narrowly. To ensure the best-fit team can be assembled, we recommend that the minimum past performance thresholds for key personnel be reduced. This would provide greater flexibility in staffing while still maintaining the intent of ensuring experienced leadership and technical capability.

Resolution: Unchanged. Per Section M, Page 6 of 18 Phase I: - Submissions that demonstrate an ability to meet the completion date of 30 Sep 2026, may be considered more favorably than those that reflect an alternative date of completion.

Page 11 of 18 Phase II: A design and technical solution that supports a delivery date of 30 SEP 2026 is most the important Evaluation Factor. The government required completion date is 30 SEP 2026. The contractor’s draft schedule may reflect an alternative date for consideration by the government, but that schedule “may” impact overall Phase I consideration

Page 12 of 18: A technical solution that demonstrates an understanding of the requirements and the opportunities to achieve the 30 Sep 2026 deadline through innovation means and methods

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Project stipend: Our team agrees with limiting the shortlisted firms to no more than three. To help improve technical responses, allow for advanced design work during the solicitation, and reduce overall project risks our team would respectfully request the stipend amount be increased somewhere between $300,000 to $500,000. We feel that this is a reasonable range given the size, complexity, and lack of bridging documents available.

Resolution: Updated Section L: $500K

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Phasing and Early Opening Options: To support innovation and maximize value during design development, we respectfully request that the USFS identify specific segments of the trail that are of highest priority for early reopening. Clarifying these critical areas would allow design-build teams to thoughtfully explore construction phasing strategies that could accelerate access to key portions of the trail while final work continues elsewhere. This input would enable proposers to tailor their innovation and design presentations around phased delivery options, balancing early public access with efficient construction sequencing.

Resolution: Period for performance is stated in Section M and L. The Forest Service requires completion by 09/30/2026, as stated in the RFQ. The Forest Service will consider all proposals with alternative schedules including phase delivery options meeting this requirement.

Email 06/05/2025

Bidder Comment: Right of Way: To support accurate planning, risk assessment, and innovative design solutions, we respectfully request that the USFS provide any available right-of-way (ROW) information for the project area. Access to existing ROW data—including easements, ownership boundaries, and any known constraints—would allow teams to better evaluate constructability, permitting pathways, and potential access issues early in the design process.

Resolution: George Washington and Jefferson national Forests spatial data can be accessed here - https://www.fs.usda.gov/r08/gwj/gis USDA Forest Service Geodata Clearinghouse - An online collection of digital data related to forest resources. The clearinghouse includes boundaries and ownership, natural resources, roads and trails. You can also find downloadable map products, raster data, and links to other sources of forest resource information.

USDA Forest Service Open Data - A single point of access for data collected and managed by the Agency. This website allows access to data about individual forests or grasslands or about an area of interest that you specify on the national map. You can find and download datasets by topic area or theme or find and use map services published by the Agency.

USGS National Map - A collaborative effort among the United States Geological Survey and other Federal, State, and local partners to improve and deliver topographic information for the Nation. This source provides additional data covering National Forest lands.

Email 06/10/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 2 – Section C Contains Table 1 and section 102 both contain information about which structures need removed and replaced. The information for structures 28, 38, 39, 40, 45, 46, 47, and 48 are conflicting between table 1 and section 102. Please confirm which information is correct regarding to the required scope.

Resolution: Updated Attachment 2/ See Amendment and Attachment 002

Email 06/10/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 8 – Section M – IV. #3 Contractor Subfactor Submittal – Capability/Capacity to perform bullet 1 states to provide a layout Overview of the Project including multiple items including Control costs, Finance work, Estimate jobs and Manage cash flow. Being that USFS intends to award a firm fixed priced contract, these specific items will be incorporated into how we develop our price for the project and not play a large roll after the completion of Phase 2. As such, it is unclear what information the USFS is looking for in relation to these items and overview of the project in our Phase I submission. Please provide additional information as to what the USFS is looking for specific to these items or remove these items from those that are to be addressed.

Resolution: The question assumes “award” (“after” the completion of phase 2). The evaluation items are necessary during phase II source selection.

Email 06/10/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 8 – Section M – IV.2 “Design Experience – With respect to the Design Experience required for sample projects, we request that the project valuation be reduced to $10M and the time be increased to 10 years. Many relevant trail projects are of relatively small valuation or have been constructed over time using multiple smaller contracts. Updating this requirement would allow teams to best showcase the skillset necessary for this project Resolution: Concur. Decreased to $10M. See Section M Update.

Telephone call 6/11/2025

Bidder Comment: In Attachment 007 – Section L.2.2.G – an organized site visit is detailed for successful phase I proposers. Understanding that this portion of the trail is closed and in disrepair will the USFS allow teams to visit the site either with or without the presence or a USFS representative. If acceptable, who would be the best point of contact to request an escort?

Resolution: Not at this time. However, certain portions of the trail are visible from public highways/roads. You may be able to view key areas from vantage points. Parking lots are currently closed due to debris removal.

Telephone call

Bidder Comment: Can the lidR data be uploaded?

Resolution: Updated in Pinyon Box 04 Pre-Helene LidR Reference Data

Telephone call

Bidder Comment: Is the geotechnical information available or can it be uploaded?

Resolution: The limited geotechnical information that we have is contained within the bridge inspection reports. These reports have been uploaded.

Email 06/13/2025

Bidder Comment: In the Q&A posted on June 6th, it was stated that permitting will be handled through emergency procedures as much as legally possible. Due to the aggressive nature of the schedule and emphasis on 9/30/26 period of performance end date, please provide a reference timeline for contractors to assume this emergency permitting process will take.

Resolution: As soon as practicable.

Email 06/13/2025

Bidder Comment: In the Q&A posted on June 6th, it was stated that pre-Helene LiDAR, bridge inspection, and minor geotechnical data would be available in the technical library. Furthermore, during the Non-Mandatory Pre-Proposal Meeting 2 on 6/9/26 it was stated that this technical library would be located on the “Box” sharing website. To-date this information has not been shared. When will this information be made available?

Resolution: Your firm was given access on 6/2/2025. Access is normally given within 1hr of request receipt.

As noted on SAM.GOV notice for the presolicitation and solicitation notice:

Regulations, Specifications, and Supplemental Information

This information is available currently only by email. Due to the size, your company will have to “log-in” and download the zip files. To request access, send a request via email as follows:

Subject Line: 12445125R0002 VCT REG ACCESS REQUESTED

To: Steven.alves@usda.gov

Company Name:

SAM.GOV Unique ID:

Person Requiring Access (ONLY ONE PER COMPANY) NAME:

EMAIL ADDRESS:

Call 859-745-3131 to confirm receipt

Email 06/13/2025

Bidder Comment: Will there be any private Q&A that the forest service will accept regarding means and methods discussions that could be unique to a contractors technical approach?

Resolution: Not at this time. Per the solicitation, Section M, Phase I

· The Government places a higher value on projects that document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation. Higher values may also be achieved for projects that provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully page 11 of 20

Phase II

· A technical solution that demonstrates an understanding of the requirements and the opportunities to achieve the 30 Sep 2026 deadline through innovative means and methods. Page 13 of 20

Email 06/13/2025

Bidder Comment: In Attachment 001 – Section L – 2.4 Common Format Requirements D.4 - it states that “Large format pages for drawings and graphics: This size is only allowed in Phase II Proposals.” Can this be amended for Phase I Proposals, specifically for the organizational chart and gantt schedule?

Resolution: Concur; See Amendment 001/Section L Update

Email 06/13/2025

Bidder Comment: In the transcript from the Pre-Proposal meeting held on 06/09/2026, the final video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gTbY88fkKM) titled ”HWY 58 and Governor JUNE 2025” mentions that a debris removal contact has been awarded for removal of debris on the trail. Can details regarding this contract (ie-project number, scope, owner, letting date, etc) be made available for further review by proposing teams?

Resolution: posted in pinyon box 06 12445125F0007 Rapid Debris Removal Task Order

Bidder Comment: additional information regarding 2 structures along the Creeper Trail. We have inspection reports for all the structures except #48 I am assuming because it is a culvert. I really need a length before the storm of structure #19 and also any additional information that can be provided for #48. If it’s possible to give a general location for #48 as well that would be greatly appreciated.

Resolution: For structure #19, the length is 131 feet. For Structure #48, it is the culvert at Green Cove Station (near intersection of Green Cove Road and Discovery Road). There is no “bridge” inspection report for this culvert. The approximate location is Lat: 36.618834, Long: -81.643727.

Email 06/17/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 07 – Section L – 2.4.d.2 states that “US tabloid pages in landscape orientation may be used to supplement content and count as two pages.” Specific to the Phase 1 qualification submission this would likely apply to the Organizational Chart and the overarching schedule/Gantt chart. Do to the size and complexity of this project, and the limited amount of pages allowed for the Phase 1 submission, would the USFS consider not counting these two items against the page count or at the very least not counting the tabloid pages required for these items as two pages?

Resolution: See Question 32.

Resolution: The Forest Service’s expectation for “an effective quality control system” is a contractor-designed program that will “ensure that the design and construction of the project are in conformance with the contract and design documents” that will be implemented “throughout the duration of the contract until issuance of Final Acceptance” (page 14, para 1). Also, the QC and QA Plan shall “ensure that all major project deliverables conform to accepted design practices and comply with Forest Service design standards” (page 4, para 1). Elements of this plan are described in Section “Design Work, (j) Quality Control (QC) and Quality Assurance (QA)” and Section “Construction Work, (i) Quality Control and Quality Assurance”.

The contracting officer will accept and approve the contractor’s submitted QC/QA plan. The Quality Program Manager “will coordinate all inspection needs per the contract, testing requirements in accordance with the FP-14, lead preparatory meetings, and daily reporting with test and inspection results to the CO and QPM” (page 14, para 4).

The Forest Service’s involvement in QA/QC, construction inspection and acceptance follows requirement in FAR 52.246-12 Inspection of Construction.

Email 06/17/2025

Bidder Comment: In the “COMMENTS MATRIX FOR USDA-FS ISSUANCES: 12445125R0002 GWJ VCT Design-Build Rehab PHASE I” resolution to Question #9 stated: “At this time no geotechnical data has been collected, although previous bridge inspection reports may have useful data for the DB team to utilize. These will be provided with the Supplemental Information documents as part of the appendices.” To date no bridge inspection reports have been issued. Kindly provide the previous bridge inspection reports.

Resolution: The limited geotechnical information that we have is contained within the bridge inspection reports. These reports have been uploaded.

Email 06/17/2025

Bidder Comment: In the “COMMENTS MATRIX FOR USDA-FS ISSUANCES: 12445125R0002 GWJ VCT Design-Build Rehab PHASE I” resolution to Question #s 22, 23, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42 have not been posted yet. Kindly provide an update when these resolution to these questions will be posted.

Resolution: see this posting

Email 6/19/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 8 – Section M, page 7 - Volume IC Evaluation Factor 2: States “The Offeror should provide completed PPQs in the proposal. - Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs.” Please confirm whether we may include a copy of previously submitted PPQs in our proposal, in lieu of requesting new ones.

Resolution: Your question “states” was truncated. Please see Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

For DB projects whereby the offeror did not receive a past performance (ACASS) or whereby the CCASS or CPARS evaluation report did not specifically address design performance, the offeror shall submit a PPQ specifically for the design work associated with the DB project. Submitting only a performance award or additional information is not acceptable

Email 6/19/2025

Bidder Comment: Attachment 2 – Section C – Table 2 lists a bridge structure at mile 13.97. This structure is not listed on Table 1 or the site specific description of work in section 102 of the same document. Please clarify what, if anything, will be required for this structure.

Resolution: Feature 13.97 is listed on the Trail Log Features. This is a duplicate of the structure located at MP 13.92. The requirements for Structure 45 at MP 13.92 are detailed on Page 39 in Section 102 Virginia Creeper Trail – site Specific Description of Work.

Email 06/23/2023

Bidder Comment: "The Scope of Work (Attachment 02 – SOO) indicates that the Forest Service will provide peak flow rates and HEC-RAS 1D models for hydraulic analysis of stream and bridge crossings. These are important to avoid duplication of effort and to align with Forest Service methodology.

Can these peak flow datasets and base HEC-RAS models be released to the shortlisted design-build teams at the start of Phase II (or earlier), rather than waiting for NTP, or can they be released now?

Receiving this information earlier in the process would allow teams to begin IFE-level hydraulic analysis with alignment to FS assumptions, and avoid the need to rework team-developed models to match FS input later" Attachment 02, Section C Hydraulic Parameters, Pg 30

Resolution: Hydrologic analysis of design flood flow is required for each bridge location. The DB Team will determine if additional hydrologic analyses are necessary to support hydraulic analyses. The Forest Service will not be preparing peak flow datasets or base HEC-RAS model framework, these will be required of the contractor as described on pages 30-31 (C. Hydraulic Design Parameters).

Email 06/23/2023

Bidder Comment: Volume IC Evaluation Factor 2: Past performance of the offeror’s team (20 Page Limit) (including the architect-engineer and construction members)" We intend to submit 10 distinct projects in our proposal. Would the Forest Service consider increasing the page limit or removing the page limit entirely in order for Proposers to show their full performance evaluations for each project?"

"SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD"

II. PHASE I Call for Qualifications Evaluation Criteria, Page 2 Resolution: The Forest Service does not intend to change the page limits for submissions.

Email 06/23/2023

Bidder Comment: "Request clarification regarding Attachment 02, Section C – Design Work (pg. 5 of 41) and Construction Work (pg. 7 of 41), specifically item (m) Utilities, which outlines the following responsibilities:

Utility location and coordination with all affected utility companies

Preparation of a Utility Status Report

Utility relocation coordination with all affected utility companies

Utility Plans and Agreements" Attachment 02, Section C Design Work (pg. 5 of 41) and Construction Work (pg. 7 of 41 Resolution: The contractor will be responsible for coordinating with local utilities during the design and construction phases. There are areas where utilities will coincide with the trail. Some of these utilities may have been destroyed and will be replaced by the utility company if they are not USFS owned. Coordination with utility companies will be required. During the design phase, prepare a status report of any utilities that affect the trail and any anticipated remediation efforts that are planned, ongoing or have been completed by the utility companies. The contractor will coordinate with those utility companies along with the appropriate USFS representative. Show any utilities and utility easements on the plans. Coordinate with the USFS to aid in the processing of plans and agreements developed by the utility companies for maintaining or replacing utilities. Coordinate with USFS to ensure that new trail and structure plans will accommodate utilities that have access to the trail corridor or that collocate with the trail corridor as permitted by the USFS.

Email 06/23/2023

Bidder Comment: "Request for Clarification:

Please confirm whether the scope of work includes the complete replacement of the Washington County Service Authority (WCSA) water line and Point Broadband fiber optic cable, or if it is limited only to sections in direct conflict with proposed trail or bridge work.

If the intent is for replacement only where conflicts exist, we respectfully request additional guidance on how this should be addressed, considering that:

The WCSA water line is no longer in service and much of it was destroyed by the flood, and

The fiber optic cable is currently laid temporarily along the trail alignment.

Understanding the extent of required utility design and construction is essential for accurate planning and proposal development. We appreciate your clarification on this matter."

Attachment 02, Section C Design Work (pg. 5 of 41) and Construction Work (pg. 7 of 41

Resolution: The contractor will coordinate with local utility companies. Replacement of utilities destroyed in the flood will be at the expense of those utility companies. The contractor will coordinate with the utility companies and, where permitted by the USFS, will modify the trail and structure designs to accommodate the utility work. The contractor will work with the utility companies to ensure that service can be restored where the utilities and the trail coincide. The contractor will work with contractors employed by the utility companies to restore service.

Email 06/23/2023

Bidder…