QA_05-26-2026.pdf

Project No. WA NP MORA 11(1), Project Fryingpan Creek Bridge

# General Technical Question Answer Date

1 X Could you tell me when the Frying Pan Bridge Project is scheduled to be advertised for bid?

The original plan was December 2025.

We are now anticipating a Spring 2026 (April/May) advertisement.

2/20/26

2 X

SCR 105.02(a) requires harvesting raw rock from the Stevens Canyon Road avalanche chutes "before Memorial Day weekend" each year, but also states access will only be granted "once the Park has cleared the road in May." In recent years, what has been the typical road opening date for Stevens Canyon Road, and how should bidders plan for years when the road opens close to Memorial Day weekend?

The public road opening for Stevens Canyon Road is set for May 22 this year; typically the Park clears the road for admin traffic one to two weeks ahead of public road opening; during this time the contractor would be able to access the road for avalanche chute harvesting.

The raw rock is a supplemental resource and the existing bridge rock shall be used first. The existing bridge rock will require the contractor to cut, split, and shape the rock. We will be drafting an Amendment to clarify that the Contractor is to "utilize stones conserved from existing structures.

Source additional stones from the avalanche chutes as needed"

5/20/26

3 X

SCR 575.03 limits temporary bridge foundation piles to no more than 16 piles between OHWM limits, and requires design for 100-year water surface plus 5 feet of freeboard. Has the government performed a hydraulic analysis establishing the 100-year WSE at the bridge site, and if so, can that elevation and the associated scour data be made available to bidders to support temporary work bridge design?

OHW for 100-year WSE is shown on Sheet G.2. Scour data is available in the Hydraulics Report in the physical data

5/20/26

4 X

SCR 156.04 allows full road closures up to 8 times for 6 hours each for blasting and girder setting. Does the government anticipate any preferred closure windows (e.g., overnight, weekday daytime) to minimize impact, and can closures be approved consecutively (e.g., two 6-hour closures back-to-back for an overnight 12-hour window)?

No night work allowed, and no back-to-back (e.g. no 7am to 7pm). 6 hours per calendar day during daytime is allowed for full road closures.

5/20/26

Check General or Technical

5 X

The USACE permit drawings (NWS-2025-0362 sheets H-71 through H-76) lay out a specific three-season construction sequence: Season 1 abutments and majority of riprap, Season 2 girder erection and deck, Season 3 existing bridge demolition and final riprap. How much flexibility does the contractor have to propose an alternate construction sequence, or to revise the means and methods shown in the permit drawings (for example, work bridge configuration, stream diversion footprint, or temporary girder erection foundation layout), as long as the proposed approach stays within the permitted impact footprint and timing windows? Specifically, if the contractor identifies a more efficient sequence, does the government require a permit modification through the original permitting authorities (USACE, EPA, USFS, USFWS, NMFS, NPS), or can changes be approved at the CO level under SCR

104.03 submittal authority?

Construction sequence must fall within the permitted allowances and comply with all conditions as stated in SCR 107.10

5/20/26

6 X

Permit Drawing H-75 (NWS-2025-0362, sheet 18/19) shows a "Timber Pads Alternative" with a Directly Affected impact of 168 SQFT during existing bridge demolition. NWP 14 explicitly authorizes "temporary mats" as part of the permitted activity, subject to the overall 1/2-acre NWP 14 cap. For the existing bridge demolition described in SCR 203.04, the contractor anticipates requiring approximately 2,000 SF of temporary timber crane mats to support a crawler crane and rigging operations inside the isolated, dewatered zone (mats placed on existing streambed, removed in their entirety at completion, with full streambed restoration). Will the government confirm that this scope of temporary timber mat use is within the existing NWP 14 authorization given the temporary nature of the mats and the cumulative project impacts remain below the 1/2-acre cap? If a permit modification is required, will the government coordinate the modification with USACE Seattle District, or is it the contractor's responsibility?

Timber mats fall may under the Corps allowance of one half acre for mats, provided that the mats minimize compaction and do not require ground disturbance when placing them. The contractor will be required to provide a detail of the timber matts and also show the footprint of these timber mats on design drawings in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan."

5/20/26