QUESTIONS_AND_ANSWERS_0002.pdf

QUESTION 1: I appraised one of the properties (the Moulton-owned one) that is the subject of this appraisal as GRTE 04-174 in 2020. Is this a conflict that would preclude me from undertaking this assignment?

ANSWER 1: The prior appraisal was completed 5 years ago, so this will not be an issue. Per USPAP Standards Rule 2-3, as long as the following statement is included in the Appraiser's Certification Statement, there is no conflict:

"I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding the agreement to perform this assignment."

However, there is no harm adding a brief discussion within the Scope of Work regarding the prior appraisal. The key is making the client aware of this situation. USPAP addresses the prior three-year period.

QUESTION 2: The SOW says the mineral rights, if they exist, should be valued. This is not an area of my expertise, and I would not be able to place a value on mineral rights should they exist. So, do mineral rights exist? If so, will you provide a “statement of mineral remoteness” or similar document that says no minerals exist that would be economically feasible to extract?

ANSWER 2: It is up to the appraiser to determine if mineral rights exist. If mineral rights exist, they should be considered as part of the appraisal process. No statement of mineral remoteness or similar document will be provided.

QUESTION 3: The SOW states that the appraisals should conform to Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policies (49 CFR Part 24). – This is a voluminous document that appears to speak primarily providing replacement dwellings to parties who lose their residence. However, it would appear that this document creates the opportunity for report complications that would not be anticipated in the normal course of business. Are there any atypical requirements of this project that would trigger 49 CFR Part 24 to cause work that would not otherwise be typical in USFLA-compliant appraisal?

ANSWER 3: There are no atypical requirements in this assignment. The sections of 49 CFR Part 24 that mainly apply in this assignment are "§24.102 Basic Acquisition Policies (n) Conflict of Interest", and particularly "§ 24.103 Criteria for appraisals". Read through these sections for clarity on requirements.

QUESTIONS 4: The SOW states that the appraiser shall verify access to the parcels. Will the appraiser have access to a title or legal professional with which to confirm access questions? (perhaps someone at the title company that produced the title report that would be responsive to questions).

ANSWER 4: A copy of the Title Commitment and Warranty Deed will be provided upon contract award.

QUESTION 5: The SOW states that the “formulas for all calculations used to arrive at adjustments amounts in the sales comparison Grid must be written in the narrative portion of the analysis.” Would support for qualitative adjustments have to be provided in a formulaic fashion?

ANSWER 5: Qualitative adjustments should be fully explained within the narrative portion of the analysis, and market data support provided, however, they do not have to be provided in a formulaic fashion. Note: Quantitative adjustments should also be fully explained and support for the adjustments should also be provided.

QUESTION 6: We received information on this project from your office directly and from an intermediary that identified themselves as “Muhammad Talha from Govcrest.com.” Mr. Talha’s email, which described the scope of work in a general fashion, included a statement that “The appraiser will:

Evaluate the market value of each tract to determine if the exchange is of approximately equal value.” Does this assignment simply require the production of two appraisals, or is some narrative required that speaks to the equal or unequal value of the parcels?

ANSWER 6: This assignment requires the production of two appraisals; one for each tract (04-174 and 04-131A).

QUESTION 7: The Appraisal due dates are based off of engagement date, with response dates to any review questions being due in a specified time period from the appraiser’s receipt of the review. In the interest of assessing my schedule, when do you think this bid will be awarded?

ANSWER 7: The time frame for award can vary depending on the amount of interest and the number of quotes that need to be evaluated. In addition, administrative time required to complete the award action will also vary however, the anticipated date of award is approximately between 11 and 14 August 2025.

QUESTION 8: A request to provide a map each tract was requested.

ANSWER 8: The two attachments provided with original solicitation depict the same information for both tracts, the the following should add clarity, Red area: Moulton Tract (04-174) Orange area: Government tract to be exchanged (04-131A)

QUESTION 9: I did want to ask right away about the period of performance (listed as 8/4 – 10/3). I am just confirming that these reports (a separate report is requested for each parcel) are both due by 10/3/25. My office manager gave the document a quick scan and there was reportedly a reference to one report being due 30 days from engagement and one being due 45 days from engagement. However, the first page of the attached PDF reports a performance period of 8/4 - 10/3. I just want to confirm the time period of the work to be completed.

ANSWER 9: The overall period of performance anticipated for this project is 60 days. the Statement of Work describes the deliverable schedule which states 30 days from award for first report and 45 days from award for second report, the anticipated review time is no more than 15 days, thus the 60 day period.