ADDENDUM NO. 3 DOA 26-7.pdf
PDF 190 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Airport Environmental Consultant Services
- Solicitation number
- RFP 120 DOA 26-7 4
- Issued by
- Palm Beach County, Florida
About this file
This is Addendum No. 3 to a solicitation for Airport Environmental Consultant Services issued by the State of Florida Department of Agriculture. The addendum provides clarifications and modifications to the original procurement documents for environmental consulting services at Florida airports. The addendum addresses questions and concerns raised by prospective bidders regarding project scope, requirements, and evaluation criteria. Key modifications include revisions to technical specifications, clarifications on deliverables, and adjustments to evaluation weightings. The document maintains the original response deadline and contract award timeline while providing additional guidance to ensure bidder compliance and understanding of project expectations.
The addendum includes pricing clarifications, updates to contract terms and conditions, and specifications regarding incumbent performance and transition requirements. It addresses funding sources and budget parameters for the environmental consulting services. The document provides specific direction on proposal submission requirements, insurance and bonding provisions, and qualifications standards for consultant teams. Any modifications to set-asides, small business participation requirements, or contract renewal options are detailed within the addendum provisions to ensure all bidders have consistent information for proposal preparation.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
DOA 26-7 Addendum No. 3
JULY 14, 2026
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
PALM BEACH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF AIRPORTS
PROJECT NAME: Airport Environmental Compliance Consultant Services
PROJECT NUMBER: DOA 26-7
DESCRIPTION: Request for Proposals (Qualifications Based Selection Process)
ADDENDUM NUMBER 3
Date of Issue: July 14, 2026
This addendum modifies or interprets the proposal documents by additions, deletions, clarifications, corrections, or other type of modifications. Addenda will become part of the
Contract Documents. Proposers, upon receiving addenda, shall insert same into the Proposal
Documents.
It is required that Addendum Number 3 be signed in the Acknowledgement of Receipt below and attached to the Proposal and become part of the Proposal.
Acknowledgement of Receipt of Proposer
ADDENDUM NO. 3
This addendum includes the following:
1. Questions
Question: Should subconsultant qualifications and personnel be included within the prime consultant's SF 330 submission, or should separate SF 330s be submitted for each subconsultant firm?
Response: III. F. A team of subconsultants should not be presented in the Proposal due to the unknown specific scope of work to be assigned through each CSA. Subconsultants will be identified during CSA development.
Question: Are meeting notes, presentation materials, attendee questions, and/or a recording from the July 1, 2026, non-mandatory pre-proposal meeting available?
Response: These were included in Addendum No. 2 posted on VSS.
Question: Does the County have a preferred binding format for the hard-copy proposal submission (e.g., three-ring binder, comb/GBC binding, etc.)?
Response: The County does not have a preferred binding format.
Question: Can the County provide the anticipated contract value, estimated annual spending, or historical expenditures associated with this continuing services contract?
Response: Annual total value of all contracts issued under this RFP is estimated to be
$500,000, however, no work is guaranteed.
Question: Is it necessary to include organizational charts in both Tab 3 and Tab 4 (SF 330
Section D), or may the organizational chart be included in one location?
Response: One organizational chart is acceptable.
Question: For firms responding to the Wildlife category, is an Airport Wildlife Biologist required as part of the proposed team, or will other qualified wildlife professionals with relevant airport experience satisfy the requirement?
Response: This will be determined on a task-by-task basis.
Question: For the Wildlife category identified in the Scope of Services, are firms required to include an Airport Wildlife Biologist? Additionally, are there any specific licenses, certifications, or minimum qualifications required for the professional proposed to support this category?
Response: This will be determined on a task-by-task basis.
Question: The sample CCNA documents included with the solicitation reference minimum font size and margin requirements for the Letter of Interest; however, those requirements do not appear in the proposal instructions. Do the font size and margin requirements identified in the sample CCNA documents apply to this solicitation?
Response: Yes.
Question: Does the Department want all parts of the SF330 form included in the proposal?
Response: Please submit the entire Standard Form 330 as part of the Proposal
Submission.
Question: Are qualifications in all Four Impact Categories (Air, Water, Waste, and Wildlife) required?
Response: The DOA will evaluate the proposals based on what is submitted. We will ensure all areas are covered by the three firms selected.
Question: As we prepare our proposal for DOA 26-7 Airport Environmental Compliance
Consultant Services, we would kindly like to request fillable PDF versions of the required forms.
Response: The RFP contains fillable forms in the attachments.
This Addendum includes the following attachments:
None.
END OF ADDENDUM NO. 3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .