Attachment_01_SOW DRAFT.docx

Sam Houston Trail Bridge Replacement – Attachment 01 - Statement of Work

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 This Project includes all labor, materials, equipment, supplies, travel, supervision, and incidentals necessary for the full design and construction of (18) Trail Bridges on the MUT (Multi-Use Trail) of the Sam Houston National Forest west of New Waverly, TX. Work includes:

1.1.1 Phase A: Site Investigation and Analysis

1.1.2 Phase B: Design and Construction Document Preparation

1.1.3 Phase C: Removal and disposal of existing crossing infrastructure, construction of new crossings, and construction and connecting of trail approaches from the existing trail to the new crossings.

1.2 The contractor may adopt a phased approach to completion of the crossings due to the number of sites as well as the varied locations and potential varied crossing types proposed.

2.0 BACKGROUND AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

2.1 The Sam Houston Multi-Use Trail is rated as a Class 3 All-Terrain Vehicle/Off-Highway Vehicle (ATV/OHV) trail and is open to hikers, mountain bikers, horse riders, ATVs, and off-road motorcycles. However, motorcycles account for 85 to 90 % of the motorized use. Due to the highly erodible soils (sand and mottled clay) and recent major storm events, there are multiple failed or failing trail bridges throughout the multi-use trail system. The existing trails are approximately 60 inches wide and are native surfaced with some sections of hardened tread and concrete pavers.

2.2 Detailed and site-specific characteristics are shown in the attached inspection reports and the GIS data. The common deficiency of the crossings is substructure failure due to insufficient span or changes in channel alignment or cross section. These changes have been particularly exacerbated by the intensity of recent storms, but evidence of this shift is seen in watercourses across the landscape and can be reasonably credited to increased adjacent land development and associated runoff shifts as well as increased intensity and recurrence intervals of damaging storms.

2.3 Recommended design considerations and strategies for each crossing are detailed in the GIS data and generally include:

2.3.1 Minimum deck width of 72”.

2.3.2 Increased spans and freeboard compared to existing structures.

2.3.3 Deep foundations to accommodate existing and future channel changes and/or uplift and shear resistance to overtopping events.

2.3.4 Modular and field-constructable design(s) due to site distances from roads.

2.3.5 Elevated multi-span boardwalk structures for crossings in shallow gradient streams with wide floodplains where a structure with sufficient span and freeboard would be infeasible and planned overtopping is a preferable option.

2.3.6 Tread hardening with ABC at all trail approaches with trail drainage directed away from substructures.

2.3.7 Wearing surfaces and structural capacity for trail maintenance equipment or alternatively proposed wet-crossing bypasses depending on site and proposed structure. Currently in use are a SWECO 480, IHI 15NX, and IHI IC35.

2.3.8 General Forest Service design considerations are discussed in FSH 7709.56b @ https://www.fs.usda.gov/cgi-bin/Directives/get_dirs/fsh?7709.56b, Chapters 20, 40, and 60 apply to trail structures. Note that these are merely recommendations to aid in design, not contract requirements which are adopted by including this reference. Many standard designs and methodologies may be non-applicable due to the challenging soil and stream site conditions common in this project locale.

2.3.9 Riprap or other streambank hardening is not recommended due to erodibility of adjacent soils and ineffectiveness of past hardening attempts. If hardening is included in design, it should be outside of the typical wetted perimeter, not constrain stream flow (which increases energy), and be utilized for long-term meander deterrence rather than immediate substructure protection.

2.4 Resource Coordination:

2.4.1 Cultural:

SHPO Consultation and Clearance has been completed for several of the crossings and is in progress for the remaining structures as well as the entirety of the MUT trail alignment. Coordinate with the FS during Phase A to receive results and any identified constraints which will influence design in Phase B.

2.4.2 Wildlife:

Seasonal restrictions for work or travel being completed within 200’ of Red-cockaded Woodpecker trees will be restricted from April 1st – July 31st unless otherwise permitted by the District Biologist. Occurrences will be surveyed and communicated by the FS during Phase A.

2.4.3 Hydrological:

Permitting through USACE is not anticipated with the design criteria of deep foundations and extended spans.

Equipment access through watercourses should travel perpendicular to crossing and occur as little as is feasible for construction.

All areas of disturbance shall be seeded with a Forest Service approved mix which will be communicated depending on season of application.

3.0 CONTRACTOR REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Phase A- Site survey:

3.1.1 Preliminary cross sections, notes, and photos collected May 2025 are included in the inspection reports and GIS data. Additional site survey will be required and may include but is not limited to geotechnical analysis of representative soils, additional cross sections or topographical survey, and site access assessments. Results will be submitted as an Engineering Report.

3.2 Phase B - Design

3.2.1 Minimum 500-year storm interval with 30% debris blocking and 18” freeboard. However, recent storms have indicated that established storm intervals and data are no longer accurate, and observation and survey of recent damages and flood extents may be more informative in this determination.

3.2.2 Design shall conform to “LRFD Guide Specifications for the Design of FRP Pedestrian Bridges”, which as of May 2025, has a second Edition specifically addressing requirements for FRP structures which may be applicable to this project.

3.2.3 Plans will include: a list of applicable standard and special contract requirements; applicable special contract requirements; a construction submittal list; schedule of items; and, applicable engineering design, and quantity calculations. It is the contractor’s responsibility to coordinate design reviews at different design stages to remain on schedule.

3.2.3.1 35% Conceptual Design: finalized design criteria and preliminary drawings and written descriptions to illustrate the design of the crossings.

3.2.3.2 65% Preliminary Design: form, arrangement, size, and materials of the work.

3.2.3.3 90% & 100%: working drawings, specifications, and other documents describing the work in sufficient detail to allow accurate and complete construction.

3.3 Phase C – Construction

3.3.1 Refer to general requirements for Forest Service projects outlined in Attachment 01.

3.3.2 General QA/QC shall be conducted as outlined in the Plan submitted by the contractor and approved by the Forest Service.

3.3.3 Daily progress reports shall be managed by the Site Superintendent or Quality Control lead and submitted to the Forest Service weekly.

3.3.4 Results from any third-party testing shall be included as attachments either with the weekly report or shared as they are received.

3.3.5 Updated schedule shall be provided bi-weekly as construction progresses.

3.3.6 Provide 3 days advance notice for any Governmental inspections required for work approval prior to advancing.

4.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED TASKS

4.1 May 2025 site inspections, photos, cross sections, GIS data, and recommendations

4.2 SHPO Consultation for Cultural Resources

4.3 Identification of Red-cockaded Woodpecker trees

5.0 DELIVERABLES

14 days from NTP

21 days from NTP

5.6 Q/A/QC Plan – Design

5.6.1 The contractor shall submit a detailed QA/QC Plan describing each step that will be taken during the development of the project. Each step should have an appropriate space where a senior member of the firm can initial and date when the action has been completed. The Plan shall include a review checklist that verifies coordination has been made between the various professional design disciplines, cross-checks have been made between callouts/references to other sheets/details, design criteria have been met, and that all submittal requirements have been met, and a complete submittal package has been prepared and ready for submission, prior to each submittal.

5.7 Kick-off Meeting

5.7.1 Meeting intent is to gather existing data, establish goals, objectives, and design criteria for the project and to develop alternative design approaches.

5.8 Engineering Report

5.8.1 Report shall incorporate all engineering computations, test and survey results, code review and references/citations, assumptions, maps, drawings, and all other similar pertinent information to document and support recommendations provided.

5.9 Design Meeting & Updated Schedule:

5.9.1 Meeting intent is to utilize a collaborative approach to create realistic and achievable designs. It is anticipated that the meeting will be a one-day process and at a minimum, shall include Forest Service staff, and the contractor’s project manager, civil/structural engineer, and construction manager.

5.10 35% Conceptual Design

5.10.1 Finalized design criteria and preliminary drawings and written descriptions to illustrate the design intent of the crossings.

5.11 65% Preliminary Design

5.11.1 Finalized form, arrangement, size, and materials of the crossings.

5.12 90% & 100% Final Design

5.12.1 Working drawings, specifications, submittal list, and other documents describing the work in sufficient detail to allow accurate and complete construction. Plan-in-hand site visit(s) held with the 90% planset prior to 100% finalized and approved product.

6.0 SCHEDULE OF ITEMS

(Breakout per crossing in Attachment 03 SOI)

LS

(Breakout per crossing in Attachment 03 SOI)

LS

7.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.1 Technical Approach

7.1.1 2 pages max, no detailed design or technical information

7.2 Technical Qualifications

7.2.1 Experience and Capabilities

7.2.1.1 The Government will assess and evaluate the specialized experience and technical competence of the offeror (or identified subcontractors) with a focus on experience that is relevant to the specified scope of work.

7.2.2 Capability to Perform

7.2.2.1 The Government will assess the Key Personnel performing the design work shall have the appropriate education, experience, certifications, and professional registrations, as appropriate, to perform the services required. All designs shall be performed or supervised by a certified Professional Engineer (Design Engineer) registered in the state in which the bridges are to be installed. Final plans and drawings shall be signed and sealed by the Design Engineer.

7.2.3 Past Performance

7.2.3.1 Past performance is a measure of the degree to which the offeror (including major subcontractors) has satisfied previous customers and complied with Federal, State and Local laws and regulations. The Government may contact references to assess the quality of the contractor’s work, timely completion, project management, and compliance with regulatory requirements. The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data and general trends in contractor performance.

The past performance evaluation will characterize the level of the Government’s confidence that the offeror will successfully complete the work, in compliance with all contract requirements, based on its record of successful performance on recent and relevant similar projects.

In addition to past performance information submitted by the offeror, the Government may use personal knowledge or information obtained from other sources, such as CPARS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or any other sources available to the Government, in its evaluation of an offeror’s past performance.

Where there is little or no information available regarding the offeror’s past performance history because the offeror is new to the marketplace, the past performance evaluation may take into account information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the work.

7.3 (Optional) Any Alternative Technical Concepts (ATC's)

7.3.1 Reference Paragraph 1.6 in Attachment Design Build General Requirements To promote innovation by Offerors and to maintain flexibility in the procurement process, the government may allow Offerors to submit for consideration ATCs that modify the Basic Configuration or other Contract requirements for Task Order RFQ/RFP’s.

In order to be approved, an ATC must be deemed, in the Government’s sole discretion to provide a Project that is "equal or better" on an overall basis than the Project would be without the proposed ATC. Concepts that simply delete scope, lower performance requirements, lower standards, or reduce contract requirements are not acceptable as ATC's.