Questions_and_Answers_0001.docx

Q. South Tobacco Roots and Alder Gulch Prescribed Fire Project Section 106 Class III Cultural Resources Inventory Madison County II. Project Location: “BLM will obtain permission from the landowners for the inventory”. Will the permission from the landowners be in writing and will the contractor be provided a copy of the documentation?

A. Private landowners will be signing a cooperative agreement that includes language concerning access to their land for cultural resources inventory. The contractor can be provided with a copy of that agreement.

Q. III. Specific Background: First paragraph last sentence: “The Alder Gulch 1 Unit is within the boundary of the Virginia City National Historic Landmark (NHL) and sites within this boundary need to be evaluated for their potential contribution to the NHL”. V. Statement of Work D. states “ Site update forms will be completed for all sites with Smithsonian numbers including previously documented sites that are not relocated”. Considering these statements, please clarify if the site form for 24MA0723, which is an Historic American Building Survey for Virginia City, will require redocumentation and updating of these historic buildings? In addition, according to the Montana SHPO there are over 300 known individual sites with Smithsonian numbers that are located within the Landmarks boundary that are not indicated on Site form 24MA0723. Will the contractor be required to relocate and update these sites? As far as we can ascertain there is no justification in Site Form 24MA0723 “Virginia City National Historic Landmark (SOW 2022: page 3 III. Specific Background)” that justifies the Landmark boundary or that identifies which sites and justification for them to be included.

A. Updating the site form for the VC Historic District/NHL, identified as 24MA0723, is NOT part of this scope of work as part of the NHL boundary is outside the inventory area. Rather it is expected that if a site falls within the boundary of the NHL, that the NRHP assessment and evaluation of that site would include if the site could potentially contribute to the VC Historic District (ie. does the mine site date to the 19th century and did it significantly contribute to the VC historic period). If it's a mine site from the 1950s, than it would not contribute to the VC Historic District even if its within the district/landmark boundaries.

Q. V. Statement of Work E. 5 “Record all cultural properties, including previously recorded sites, on site or isolated find forms in line with BLM ownership”. Please clarify if those sites located on private property will also need to be recorded and documented on the appropriate BLM site or isolated site form. V. Statement of Work E. 3. And F. 2. Does this also apply to diagnostic and rare artifacts located on private land?

A. All sites and isolated finds regardless of land ownership are to be documented on the appropriate forms.

Q. V. Statement of Work E.8 “The USFS will review site forms for sites on BDNF lands”. Will recording of these sites or working on Forest Service require a permit? Will the Forest Service individual be informed of the SOW and project timeline? Will the contractor be responsible for providing copies of the final site forms to the Forest Service? Will the BLM also require copies of these site forms for adequacy, and will the BLM be the final decision maker regarding adequacy and content?

A. No inventory is located on Forest Service lands. That is a holdover from a previous SOW. It has been removed, see the Updated SOW.

Q. V. Statement of Work VI Health and Safety Concerns: “Areas considered by the Field Director to pose health or safety concerns shall not be inventoried or otherwise entered by any field crew members”. We assume this may also include active mining sites.

A. That is a good assumption. Active mining sites should not be inventoried. BLM is not aware of any mining sites within the inventory areas.

Q. I have a quick question re: Christenot Unit (Page 2 of the SOW). When I compare the map in the SOW with T7S, R2W Sections 7, 12, and 18 it appears that Section 12 is located to the east outside the boundary area of the unit. Could this Section number (12) be a typo?

A. Change has been made, please see the updated SOW.

Q. We are hoping to find out if there is (was) an incumbent contractor performing these services, or if this is a brand new contract.

If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the current / previous contract number?

A. There is no incumbent, this is a new requirement.

Q. Can the BLM provide shapefiles?

A. Shapefiles can be requested by emailing the CO at jmanseau@blm.gov. We are unable to attach them to the solicitation.