260211 Iargo Springs RFI log for Q and A.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 1 MB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 12445526B0002
- Issued by
-
Department of Agriculture Forest Service
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) log documenting inquiries submitted during the Request for Information (RFI) phase for Solicitation Number 12445526B0002, the GAOA Iargo Springs Interpretive Site Stair and Boardwalk Renovation project. The document captures 24 substantive questions and responses as of February 11, 2027, addressing contractor concerns regarding project execution, site access, design specifications, and scheduling.
Key guidance from the responses includes: alternates to specified materials (such as Sonotube instead of concrete columns) require written notification to the contracting office at least seven days before bid opening and Contracting Office approval via change notice; the project involves replacement of approximately 300 steps, decking, landing areas, and boardwalk sections on a steeply sloped site within 100 feet of a parking lot; equipment such as mini excavators and skid steers may access the site, though any equipment-induced damage must be remediated and the slope restored to original grade; contractors retain discretion on construction methodology but the Forest Service prioritizes maintaining site integrity and does not envision road construction down the slope; the 545-day completion timeline is measured from notice to proceed (not the 2027 date), with the Government believing work can be completed in one construction season; winter work is permissible if safely executed; the site will be closed to public access during construction with the contractor responsible for barricades and signage; tree clearing must align with drawings and specifications with additional clearing requiring Forest Service approval; a safety plan will be required post-award; and alternative footing systems such as diamond piers or helical piles may be considered subject to professional engineering review and stamping addressing frost depth, slope steepness, and soil conditions. This is a small business set-aside solicitation.
View the file
Other files
Show all 30
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| RFI log | As of 2/11/2027 | gov or FS = Forest Service | |
| Sol No. 12445526B0002 HMF Iargo Spring Stairs Replacement | |||
| No. | Inquiry | Answer | Posted Supporting Documents If Applicable) |
| 1 | Will you accept alternate offers? | !! The FS understands there have been a few alternate ideas in lieu of concrete columns (Sonotube was specifically called out). We will allow alternates however they MUST be submitted earlier in the bid process. |
ALTERNATES: A Bidder who wants to offer an alternate must notify the Contracting Office in writing (to Paul.boucher@usda.gov and cc debra.brinn@usda.gov), at least seven (7) days prior to the scheduled Bid opening, that the Bidder intends to offer an alternate in its Bid. An “alternate” is a product that deviates from the requirements of the specifications in its composition, qualities, performance, size dimension, etc. The written notification from the Bidder must include a complete description of the alternate and must identify the product’s deviations from the specifications. Upon receipt of the notification, the Issuing Office will determine whether the alternate is acceptable. If the Issuing Office, in its discretion, determines that the alternate is acceptable, the Issuing Office will issue a change notice to the invitation for bids that revises the specifications allowing for the alternate specifications. This will be labeled as alternate option leaving the original specifications as an option as well. If no change notice is issued revising the specification, a Bid offering the alternate will not be considered for award.
| 2 | We would like to confirm whether there are any preference programs applicable to this solicitation, such as HUBZone or other state‑recognized certifications. | This is Small Business set aside without socioeconimcal preferences | |
| 3 | On the trail leading up to the boardwalk/stairs what kind of equipment can be accommodated (what's the largest equipment that you can use) Is it able to be driven on? Will it accommodate equipment like a mini excavator or a larger size skid steer that could be used. Maybe pick up trucks or anything for transportation, or do we have to use smaller size stuff for the area. | ||
| If we use anything to bring stuff up there, are we responsible for the trail remediation or bringing it back to existing? And do how do we go about bringing the trail back to existing if the trails are not like kind of in disarray already? | The access to the stairs are very close to the parking lot. Theres a couple sidewalks that lead up to it, no trails. It is within roughly 100 feet of the parking lot where the project would start. There would be access for mini excavator or skid steer. | ||
| Damage done with the equipment would need to be remediated at the end of the project. | See attachment "Iargo Springs Google Maps.pdf" and/or "Iargo Springs Screenshot.jpg" | ||
| 4 | Could the FS just run through the project in generic form, what does it entail? | That's fairly well covered in the statement of work, which is in the beginning the section C document. FS is looking at replacement of the staircase that goes from the parking lot area down to the AuSable river. There's approximately 300 steps and then there's decking and landing areas between the two. Fixing some of the boardwalk at the bottom of the hill (there's a section of boardwalk that gets demolished, and then there's a new piece of railing to cut off where it was demolished) | |
| 5 | We would have to haul whatever is demo’d all out? Nothing is left behind. | Anything that is demoed needs to be legally disposed of and yes, that site is very steep. The design tried to take that into account and in how the gov thinks this can get built. | |
| 6 | Was the thought process or the intent of construction to use equipment to cut in a route or were you anticipating people doing this entirely by hand? | It's up to the contractor how they approach getting the work done. The slopes themselves are really steep. If contractors think that they can get equipment down to the bottom of the hill FS will try to work with them on that. The redesign on the project was to make it as easy as possible in the event the contractors have to lean towards hand work. That's why the design took the helical piles out of the project this time. | |
| 7a | Will we be able to cut a flat path underneath the stairwell so we'll be able to drive machinery down there, kind of traverse down that hill the same way stairs are going. And if we are allowed to do that, do we have to restore it? | ||
| (The stairway kind of traverses down the steep angle of the hill. Will we be able to cut a flat path underneath that stairway so we can use a piece of machinery to traverse up this hill. And if we are allowed to do that, do we have to restore it?) | The FS is unsure how that would work. (see below Q&A as well) |
Yes, you'll have to restore it.
| 7b | If a flat route is cut in for equipment access within the pathway of the stairs there's places on that hill that are probably roughly 45° | ||
| When you say restore it are you saying some topsoil and seed for restoration and leave it flat, or does that need to be restored to match the existing grade? | The gov wants to see it restored. If you're talking of cutting a road in, it's going to end up getting pretty wide to account for all that and the slope, FS does not want to see essentailly a aroad running down the hill. If there’s other options we want to hear them. If you’ve been down to the site, it's unique, it's, it's wooded, it's very popular. FS wants to maintain the integrity of that site. That's number one priority. FS doesn't envision building a road and feels that is what the cut would turn into. FS wants to see things remediated at the end. That would mean returning the slope to original. Also it is steep and additional disruption to the soil would add instability. | ||
| 8 | Did you do a full slope analysis? They are called breakaway or different terms, but it's a global slope analysis. Has that been done? | No | |
| 9 | It doesn't specifically say but is each column/footing going to be in the exact same place as the as the old one? | No, new one is wider than the existing one. All new footings will be outside of existing footings. | |
| 10 | If you had to remove existing footings, I wouldn't want to disturb the soil in those spots. I'd like to cut the poles off and leave footers there. |
Rather than try to pull them out. Is that an option? I saw that removal is required, but for slope stability can they be cut off and the concrete left.
| 11 | Is it possible to consider an alternative of helical piles instead of the concrete footings if they meet the same design load? | The first time this went out to bid, it was designed with helical piles. Technically yes helical piles could be considered. The FS discovered the first time was contractors weren't sure how the equipment could get in there to do helicals. (please see question answer #1 above for additional guidance on alternatives) |
| 12 | When are RFIS due before the bid date? | The solicitation says when submitting questions: Allow reasonable time for response prior to solicitation closing date. We do not have a cut off date however we reserve the right to not consider questions that come in within the last 4 days before bid opening. |
Anyone intending on submitting an alternate offer MUST notify us in writing as soon as possible in advance of the bid date or the bid will be rejected. Intent to use an alternate that is received within 6 days or less of the bid opening may not be considered.
| 13 | Related to the timeline and the completion date. It says a completion date of sometime in 2027 but it also says 545 days after notice to proceed. It did say something about being able to adjust the notice to proceed. Is that 2027 date a hard deadline, or is that just an assumed deadline based on when you think the contract will be issued and then adding that 545 days? Is that flexible or is the 2027 date a hard deadline? | The gov procurement system requires specific date fields be completed and the 2027 date was unfortunately a mandatory field. FS is using 545 days after notice to proceed as the completion date. Part of the concern is having it shut down the site for two full peak seasons in a row (Memorial day to Labor day). Once contractor starts work, we want it to be worked until completed. FS doesn't want unnecessary downtime in the middle, especially during the summer. There is a little bit of leeway on when the notice to proceed is issued. FS would like to see a schedule and will try to work with the contractor on accomodating that. It’s the government’s belief that all of the work can be done in one construction season. There are also restrictions on the tree cutting. |
| 14 | Can we work in the winter time? Is that area shut down in the winter? | You could work in the winter if it can be done safely. |
| 15 | If the government shuts the site down in the summer, we can work throughout all the way up till the next season. When is the next season open up? When is the site shut down and when does it start? | The site does not shut down. It remains open 24/7, all year. It will only be shut down from public access for the purpose of this project. |
| 16 | Would we divert traffic and people that go there? Is there another route down to the bottom? If this is under construction, can the public get down some other way? (trying to scale down the side or along side of it or anything) We'd have to somehow just shut it down and post signage to stay out completely? | The site will be closed to the public. There's not really another way to access the area and it'll be "officially" and lawfully closed by the Forest Service to the public. The entire parking lot should be barricaded/closed off by the contractor to the public and from access by River Road traffic. The Forest Service will give notice to the public through our public affairs points of contacts, local paper and etc regarding the closures. The site is not really close enough to any other established area for anyone to scale over. They would have a long walk to get there. It'll be very clearly identified that it's closed. |
| 17 | Talking about the the pedestrian traffic and the site being closed during your busiest season, how will that impact us and the Forest Service for the season if we're shutting this down? Loss of money and everything. Would it make sense to do it in the fall season or the other seasons? That's why I was asking about working in winter. | It's not a fee site. It's just very popular. If you felt it was best to work through the fall and winter, that would be fine by FS as long as it can be done safely (Michigan winters taken into consideration) it would be better for the public but we're going to leave that to the contractor as contractor safety is also a priority. |
| 18 | Is there anything that you need us to do in addition to this boardwalk project as far as traffic control and safety? Do you want anything placed at all to close off specific things just in case somebody tries to hop over something? Does the government just use snow fencing or signs everywhere? Do we need to do anything in addition to that sign that you're going to post? | The FS doesn't believe snow fencing is needed around the site. Signage and temporary barricades at the parking lot entrances will be the big thing. If the public tries to enter the site the contractor will need to keep people off the site. Contractor may need to explain that the site is closed (send them down to Lumbermen's Monument which is only a couple miles away) and if things get persistently bad then let us know and we'll get some law enforcement in there to help keep people out. FS will be requesting “official” closure through the Forest Supervisor to make it a lawful closure. FS does not anticipate the public trying to access the site if it is clearly identified as closed. |
The contractor is responsible for closing the site and using some form of adequate temporary barricades closing off access to the parking lot and work site. 52.236-13(b) In addition, for contracts for construction or dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements, the Contractor shall—
(1) Provide appropriate safety barricades, signs, and signal lights;
The Forest Service may provide additional signage however it would only be in addition to the contractors responsibility.
Refer to Section 156 – Public Traffic of the FSSS on page 31 of Section C. The contractor is required to install and maintain temporary traffic control devices adjacent to and within the project.
| 19 | When you have a walkthrough later, if there's more questions that everybody's got at the site, will that come out in an addendum and such? | Yes. Those will be posted to SAM inclusive of the questions from this meeting. |
| 20 | If we can't make it out to the site today, can we reschedule it. | The site is open Year round. Contractors are more than welcome to look at any time without scheduling anything. Any questions should be sent to Paul Boucher and cc to Debra Brinn |
| 21 | How much tree clearing is needed? | Tree clearing should be in accordance with what is shown in the drawings and specs. If there is a benefit or need to removing additional trees, that would be a case by case basis and need to be coordinated and approved by Forest Service. |
| 22 | Clearing limits for cable ways | Removal of additional trees outside of limits shown in the drawings and specs would need to be coordinated and approved by Forest Service |
| 23 | Clarification on safety plan and OSHA jurisdiction | For contractor responsibilities regarding Health, Safety, & Accident Prevention please refer to Specifications FP-14 Section 107.08 and FAR Clause 52.236-13. Per reference in FAR 52.236-13; contractor shall … (2) Comply with the standards issued by the Secretary of Labor at 29 CFR Part 1926 and 29 CFR Part 1910... |
The Submittal Schedule on page 10 of Section C does not specifically ask for the Contractors safety plan, but it should have. Safety plan will be reqired post award as a submittal
| 24 | A request to use diamond pier in lieu of concrete | We have concerns about frost depth and the steepness of the slope. If we were to consider using this product we would require a PE review and stamp that this system would work in our combination of frost, slope and soils. |
| 25 | ||
| 26 | ||
| 27 | ||
| 28 | ||
| 29 | ||
| 30 | ||
| 31 | ||
| 32 | ||
| 33 | ||
| 34 | ||
| 35 | ||
| 36 | ||
| 37 | ||
| 38 | ||
| 39 | ||
| 40 | ||
| 41 | ||
| 42 | ||
| 43 | ||
| 44 | ||
| 45 | ||
| 46 | ||
| 47 | ||
| 48 | ||
| 49 | ||
| 50 | ||
| 51 | ||
| 52 | ||
| 53 | ||
| 54 | ||
| 55 | ||
| 56 | ||
| 57 | ||
| 58 | ||
| 59 | ||
| 60 | ||
| 61 | ||
| 62 |
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .