54 North QA-RFP S.14694~1.pdf

RFP: S-62900-00014694 – 54 North Fuels Reduction & Huckleberry Restoration FY26 Q&A

RFP S-62900-00014694

54 North Fuels Reduction & Huckleberry Restoration FY26

Questions & Answers

1. Can you share the draft proposed action description?

a. Yes, please see new attachment “54 North Project Information-Proposed Action”

2. When do we anticipate the contract will be awarded and the project kicked off?

a. We estimate the Notice of Intent to Award to be issued 9/25/25 with the Contract to be awarded after the protest period ends in early October (as outlined in the Schedule 1.2).

3. Would it be possible to have the timing requirement for preparing the draft deliverables outlined in the Deliverables Schedule in the Statement of Work be tied to the receipt of the necessary information provided by ODF and UNF instead of an absolute date?

a. Our intent is to provide the Contractor with all necessary information as soon as possible after Contract award to ensure the Contractor can be successful in meeting the provided schedule.

4. Can bidders assume that the Wildlife BE can be prepared based on the government-provided proposed action, prescriptions, and analysis of baseline information? In addition, since not mentioned in the RFP, can bidders assume that no habitat modeling will be required for the Wildlife BE, such as the use of DecAID for dead and decaying wood?

a. Proposers should assume that they will need to use the relevant analysis tools to ensure that the proposed action meets the Forest Service’s legal requirements and analyzes for effects to federally listed, Regional Forester Sensitive, and Forest Plan (FP) speci�ic MIS species. For example:

• Referencing the appropriate provided DecAID histogram(s) for FP MIS species in any areas where the dominant overstory canopy is altered or removed. The Region has pre-built histograms of snag and down wood densities by watershed (using FS veg data) that can be pulled in to quickly show existing condition, followed by a part quantitative part qualitative narrative of project direct and indirect effects to the trajectory of dead wood and associated MIS species (primary cavity excavators, three-toed and pileated woodpeckers).

• Use of the Blue Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI) tool to ensure FP standards are being met for Rocky Mountain elk (FP MIS species); tool and guidance can be provided, but will require GIS analysis.

• GIS analyses to examine treatment effects to MIS source/core habitat.

5. To assist bidders in preparing cost estimates, can ODF provide document templates similar to those expected for this project or preferred report examples?

a. Yes, please see the two new attachments “BA Template-Format” and “BA Template-Content”

6. Is there a programmatic BiOp with NMFS and does the USFS intend for the project to clearly meet the BiOp PDCs?

a. No, there isn't a programmatic BiOp with NMFS.

7. We understand that public scoping has not yet been completed, so that bidders must make assumptions regarding the scope of analysis and major areas of public concern and interest. Can the Forest Service and ODF summarize the level of public and tribal interest and provide a summary of known or anticipated public and tribal concerns related to the 54 North project, including any major prior comments, opposition, or engagement from CTUIR or other stakeholders? Beyond common concerns related to general topics such as public access and traditional use, are there speci�ic and substantive cultural, ecological, or recreational issues that have been raised or are expected to require additional analytical effort, coordination, or design features/mitigation?

a. In the past, there have been issues related to treatments in cool/moist and fuel break treatments being too intensive (i.e. ember reduction and limited ignition zones).

8. The addendum clari�ied the language on page 6, aligning it with Section 2.4 bullet list and the SOW in the sample contract. But the revised RFP still says (underlines added):

Section 1.1 (p. 1): "The State of Oregon, acting by and through the Oregon Department of Forestry (“Agency” “ODF”), is issuing this Request for Proposal for analysis and documentation Services that are necessary for an Environmental Assessment, Decision Notice, and Finding of No Signi�icant Impact (FONSI) for the 54 North Integrated Vegetation Management Project on the Umatilla National Forest

(UNF)."

Section 2.3.3 (p.7): "The project includes but is not limited to development and producing a Finding of No Signi�icant Impact (FONSI) and Decision Notice (DN) in accordance with such requirements."

Section 2.4 (p. 7): "The scope of this RFP ... includes but is not limited to [the bullet list of meetings, reports, and data management]."

Section 5.4.1 (p. 21): "Agency is willing to negotiate ONLY the Statement of Work and the following terms and conditions: • Contract Term”

Can you please clarify what's being requested (and what is NOT being requested) in this RFP?

a. Please note the following:

• Section 1.1 is the introduction section. This is a broad introduction about the project as a whole and RFP in general, not the speci�ic ask or additional details about the Work that will be expected from a Contractor. The Work is further listed in the Scope of Work/Speci�ications section of the RFP and in Exhibit A (the Statement of Work (SOW)) of Attachment A (the Sample Contract) which is provided for a more detailed review of the Work that is expected and should be review by any potential Proposer interested in submitting a Proposal for this project.

• Section 2.3.3 is the purpose of the RFP (why we are releasing the solicitation). Please see the 2nd addendum issued with additional language modi�ications to help further clarify.

• Section 2.4 is the Scope of Work (high level overview), not the Statement of Work which is the detailed Work that will be expected of the Contractor to complete. Please review the Sample Contract (Attachment A) and more speci�ically, the SOW (Exhibit A of Attachment A) for more information. Please see the 2nd addendum issued with additional language modi�ications to help further clarify.

• Section 5.4.1 is regarding negotiations should a Proposer have modi�ications that they would like the Agency to consider. The ONLY changes the Agency is willing to accept requests for negotiations on is the SOW and Contract Term. No other requests, modi�ications or changes will be considered (e.g. contract terms, insurance requirements, etc.).

To further elaborate and clarify, the Contractor will be responsible for reports to determine effects related to the Project based on the proposed action within the legal framework of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other applicable law, regulations, and policy. This project is being analyzed as an Environmental Assessment (EA) and the Deliverables will be incorporated by reference and summarized in the body of the EA by Forest Service staff.

The Contractor is responsible for documenting the NEPA and other required environmental review of their subject area. The Forest Service will be determining what level of public engagement is anticipated and will be responsible for any type of engagement needed. Scoping is no longer required the level of engagement is at the discretion of the Agency and will be determined and implemented by the line of�icer and Forest Service staff.

The reports (see Exhibit A of Attachment A) should consider if the proposed action will have reasonably foreseeable signi�icant impacts by considering the degree of effects in the context as described in 7 CFR 1b.2(f)(3) (see below). Reports should include a discussion of the consequences of taking no action to future condition if the proposed action was not implemented (7 CFR 1b.5(c)(2)(i)). The analysis for the individual resources should include the potentially affected environment and the environmental impacts as describe in 7 CFR 1b.5(c)(3) and 7 CFR 1b.2(f)(3). Any other environmental review required outside of NEPA should also be brie�ly documented and how the proposed action complies 7 CFR 1b.5(c)(5). Analysis should help inform the line of�icer's Finding of No Signi�icant Impact (FONSI), which will need to include rational as to why the project will not have a reasonably foreseeable signi�icant impact on the quality of the human environment. The following should be considered in your analysis 7 CFR 1b.2(f)(3):

(3) When considering whether the reasonably foreseeable impacts of an action are signi�icant, USDA subcomponents will consider and analyze the potentially affected environment and degree of the effects of the action.

(i) Potentially affected environment means the condition of the physical, biological, social, and economic factors that may be impacted by an action.

(ii) In considering the degree of effects, USDA subcomponents should consider the following, as appropriate to the speci�ic action and in the context of the potentially affected environment:

(A) Both short- and long-term effects.

(B) Both bene�icial and adverse effects.

(C) Effects on public health and safety.

(D) Economic effects.

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecfr.gov%2Fcurrent%2Ftitle-7%2Fpart-1b%23p-1b.2(f)(3)&data=05%7C02%7Ckatrina.chinn%40odf.oregon.gov%7Cfd94f7b496fd4584147208ddf184bc61%7Caa3f6932fa7c47b4a0cea598cad161cf%7C0%7C0%7C638932274773023249%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OLbTBSirtfv4nd42PSlq5Ist4QqNfUGwgJIXW3pcUZU%3D&reserved=0

(E) Effects on the quality of life of the American people.

(iii) In providing rationale for whether the degree of effect is signi�icant, responsible of�icials shall consider:

(A) How the unavoidable short- and long-term adverse impacts of implementing the action compares to the short- and long-term adverse or bene�icial consequences of not implementing the action; and

(B) How the irreversible or irretrievable commitment of a resource, as part of the action, contributes to a loss of long-term productivity for the human environment.

Any supporting documentation including references cited in the reports and any meeting notes or data needed to support the �indings will need to be maintained and provided to the Forest Service at the completion of the Contract. These are part of the project record (see 7 CFR 1b.6(b)(1) and 7 CFR 1b.9(a)).