CTCLUSI RFQ ADDENDUM ONE ALL~1.pdf

1 | P a g e RFQ – Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys: Addendum One

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF

COOS LOWER UMPQUA AND SIUSLAW INDIANS

TRIBAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES

1245 Fulton Ave. • Coos Bay, OR 97420 • (541) 888-9577•1-888-280-0726

General Office Fax: (541) 888-2853 • Administration Fax: (541) 888-0302

REQUEST FOR QUOTES

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF COOS, LOWER UMPQUA, AND SIUSLAW INDIANS

Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys

ADDENDUM ONE

A. This Addendum shall be considered part of the bid documents for the above-mentioned project as though it had been issued at the same time and shall be incorporated integrally therewith. Where provisions of the following supplementary data differ from those of the original bid documents, this

Addendum shall govern and take precedence.

B. Proposers are hereby notified that they shall make any necessary adjustments in their estimates as a result of this Addendum. It will be construed that each bidder's proposal is submitted with full knowledge of all modifications and supplemental data specified herein.

Except as described below, the original bid document remains unchanged. The bid documents are modified and/or clarified, as follows:

Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys: RFQ Page 1

Introduction

The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians (CTCLUSI) is seeking quotes from qualified contractors for surveying 11 miles 8.3 miles of property boundary on CTCLUSI’s Lower Smith River

Tract.

Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys: Exhibit A Page 1

Scope of Work

Project Details:

Two phases of property boundary survey

• Phase 1 survey is approximately 7 miles 4.4 miles of boundary o 15 total corners to reestablish

• Phase 2 survey is approximately 4 miles 3.9 miles of boundary o 4 corners to establish o 12 corners to reestablish

2 | P a g e RFQ – Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys: Addendum One

Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys: Exhibit B Page 1

Map legend originally said “Phase 1: 7.1 miles” now changed to “Phase 1: 4.4 miles”

Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys: Exhibit C Page 1

The Bid Form originally had Phase 1 numbers as “7” and now are “4.4” and Phase 2 numbers as “4” and now are “3.9.”

REQUEST FOR QUOTES

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF COOS,

LOWER UMPQUA AND SIUSLAW INDIANS

Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys

Submission Deadline:

June 4, 2026, at 2:00 P.M. PST

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys

Introduction

The Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians (CTCLUSI) is seeking quotes from qualified contractors for surveying 8 miles of property boundary on

CTCLUSI’s Lower Smith River Tract.

Project Goals

The purpose of this project is to:

1. Survey, resurvey, post, and blaze lines indicated on Exhibit B (maps) per contract specifications utilizing CTCLUSI signs (furnished by CTCLUSI).

2. Rehabilitate or establish each corner as indicated in Exhibit B (maps) per contract specifications.

3. File Record of Survey for all posted lines in Douglas County which the work takes place.

Surveying will meet the standards and specifications included in this Request for Quotes. The selected contractor shall furnish all labor, equipment & materials (excluding those specified to be furnished by CTCLUSI), and supervision necessary to complete these goals.

Responsibilities

The landowner and Contracting Agency (CA) is CTCLUSI. CTCLUSI will be responsible for contract administration. The Contractor will work directly with CTCLUSI Forestry staff to meet project goals.

Required Services

Exhibit A references the Scope of Work, Specifications, and History of Survey, which detail the land survey expectations for this project. All specifications follow State and Federal law.

Project Location

From Reedsport, OR, the Lower Smith River Tract on the west side can be reached by traveling

North on Hwy 101 to Lower Smith River Road. Travel for 20 miles before turning left onto

Spencer Creek Road. Travel for 2.7 miles until turning right onto E Fork Spencer Creek Road.

Travel for 3 miles until you reach the property boundary. Alternatively, you can reach the property boundary on the east side by traveling on Lower Smith River Road for 28.6 miles before turning left on Johnson Creek Ridge Road. Travel for 2 miles before reaching the property boundary.

Project Questions

Please direct questions via email to CTCLUSI Forestry contact below:

Amy Kronsberg

Field Forester akronsberg@ctclusi.org cell (541) 294-5604 mailto:akronsberg@ctclusi.org

Timeline

Quotes (Bid) Due June 4, 2026, 2 PM PST

Survey Phase 1 Completion December 31, 2026

Survey Phase 2 Completion December 31, 2027

Quote (bid) Information

All quotes must be submitted using the Bid Format (Exhibit C) and sent by email to akronsberg@ctclusi.org, The subject line should include “Smith Tract Surveying Quote” by June

4, 2026, at 2PM PST.

Quote (bid) Documents and Format

The following items shall be submitted:

1. State the company’s experience, qualifications, and references. Include three (3) references for property line surveying from the last five (5) years.

2. Copy of PLS Stamp

3. Certificate of Insurance

4. Format your quote (bid) using the Exhibit C: Bid Form attachment in Oregon Buys

Basis of Award

Evaluation is based on price to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Quotes that conform in all material respects to the requirements stated in the advertisement are responsive;

contractors who have the capability to fully perform the contract requirements (satisfactory reference checks, technical knowledge, facilities, licenses, equipment) are considered responsible.

Gratuities and Kickbacks

• It shall be a breach of ethical standards for any person, business or Organization to offer, give or agree to give any current or former officer, agent, or employee, or for any current or former officer, agent, or employee to solicit, demand, accept, or agree to accept from another person, a gratuity or an offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering of advice, investigation, auditing or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, or any other particular matter, pertaining to any program requirement, contract, subcontract, or to any solicitation or proposal for a contract or subcontract.

3 | P a g e

• It shall be a breach of ethical standards for any payment, gratuity or offer of employment

(kickback) to be made by or on behalf of a vendor, contractor or subcontractor to a higher level of contractor as an inducement for the award of a subcontract or order for procurement.

Terms and Conditions

• The Tribe reserves the right to reject any or all quotes

• The Tribe may award without negotiation

• The Tribe is not liable for proposal preparation costs

• Contract terms will be negotiated upon selection

Rejecting the Quote

The Contracting Agency may reject the quote if it finds:

1. The contractor has not substantially complied with all prescribed Request for Quote procedures and requirements.

2. The contractor has not met the standards of responsibility, considering whether the contractor has:

• Available the appropriate financial, material, equipment, facility and personnel resources and expertise, necessary to indicate the capability of the contractor to meet all contractual responsibilities;

• Current, necessary licenses;

• Liability and other insurance in an amount necessary to meet quote requirements;

• Applicable workers compensation coverage pursuant to ORS 656.407 or 656.128

• Satisfactory record of performance;

• Satisfactory record of integrity;

• Qualified legally to contract with the Contracting Agency.

Contents:

• Exhibit A: Scope of Work and Survey Specifications o Attachment A: History of Surveys

• Exhibit B: Maps

• Exhibit C: Bid Form

• Exhibit D: Sample Contract

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A

Exhibit A: Scope of Work & Survey Specifications

Scope of Work

Project Details:

Two phases of property boundary survey

Phase 1 survey is approximately 4 miles of boundary o 15 total corners to reestablish

Phase 2 survey is approximately 4 miles of boundary o 4 corners to establish o 12 corners to reestablish

For all boundary lines included in Phases 1 and 2 above, Contractor is expected to:

Resurvey, post, and blaze lines on Exhibit B (maps) per contract specifications utilizing

CTCLUSI signs (furnished; Figures 1 and 2).

Rehabilitate or establish each corner indicated on Exhibit B (maps) per contract specifications.

File Record of Survey for all posted lines in County in which the work takes place.

Survey Specifications

These surveys will conform to the requirements of the 2009 Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management Manual of Surveying Instructions. The overall goal of marking the boundary is to provide a visual representation delineating CTCLUSI property from neighboring landowners. Selected provisions and exceptions to the 2009 manual are included below.

Tribal Boundary Signs

a) Install a Tribal Property Boundary sign (Figure 1) on a post facing outward toward the neighboring landowner. Post will be firmly installed 1.5 ft into the ground, and the sign will be mounted at 3.5 feet within one foot of the property boundary.

b) When posting, a sign shall be set 40 to 60 feet from the starting corner and then at intervals not to exceed 100 feet. In addition, line marking posts should be placed at all road crossings. A post will be placed alongside each property corner of Tribal/Federal interest land, unless a similar guard post is already in place.

Line Marking Posts

a) Signs shall be attached to 4-inch or greater diameter trees on the trust lands and shall face the adjoining land. The Tribal Boundary line marking sign (Figure 2) shall be nailed to the base of the tree at ground level, not exceeding 200 feet in distance, and shall be inscribed with the initials of the surveyor in responsible charge. Details inscribed also include the date the tag was placed, the bearing and distance (nearest 0.5 feet) from the tag to the boundary line, and the bearing and distance (nearest 5 feet) from the Tribal Boundary tag to the nearest monumented Public Land Survey System corner.

b) Signs will be attached to the tree with 2 aluminum nails per sign, protruding at least 1 inch from the tree to allow for the growth of the tree.

Boundary Line Marking with Tree Blazes and Flagging

a) See Diagrams below. Generally, all trees greater than 4 ins. in diameter and within 3 ft.

of the boundary will be blazed unless they are behind other closer trees. Blazes on trees will be painted.

b) Flagging shall be placed on each property corner, on all blazed trees that the boundary line intersects, and at the top of each line marking post. Flagging will also be placed at intervals on the boundary not exceeding 50ft.

3 | P a g e

Figure 1 Tribal Property Boundary sign, 6" x 12".

4 | P a g e

Figure 2 Tribal Boundary TRS/ line marking sign, 8" x 6".

WOTFA CTCLUSI

Chain of Survey

This document lists all the surveys found by research of BLM and Douglas County on-line records which may be needed to delineate certain federal interest lands in Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W. Additional surveys may be available through other types of research.

Official Records

In 1877, William Thiel, Deputy Surveyor, surveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., and subdivided a portion of T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

In 1883, William P. Wright, Deputy Surveyor, surveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W.

In 1891, William Thiel, Deputy Surveyor, surveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., and subdivided a portion of T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

In 1892, Nathaniel Martin, Deputy Surveyor, surveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., and subdivided a portion of T. 20 S., R. 10 W.

In 1899, Harvey L. Chandler, Deputy Surveyor, surveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W.

In 1921-22, Fred Mensch, Cadastral Engineer, resurveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., and subdivided a portion of T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

In 1951-52, Thomas A. Tillman, Cadastral Surveyor, resurveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., and resurveyed a portion of the section lines of T. 20 S., R. 10 W.

In 1953-54, Thomas A. Tillman and Joseph S. Gawron, Cadastral Surveyors, resurveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., and resurveyed a portion of the section lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

In 1982, Harvey E. Wofford, Cadastral Surveyor, resurveyed a portion of the section lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

In 2006-09, Edith M. Forkner, Cadastral Surveyor, rehabilitated and remonumented certain corner points on the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., and on the section lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

Surveys Filed with Douglas County

In 1965-66, person(s) unknown resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 10 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 11. See "BLM Administrative Surveys". (CS 65/107-12)

In 1968, Douglas County Surveyor's Office rehabilitated the 1/4 cor. of sec. 1 only, on the east boundary of T. 20 S., R. 10 W. (CS 53/66-79)

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A: Attachment A 1 | Page

In 1968, Douglas County Surveyor's Office rehabilitated the cor. of secs. 6 and 7 only, on the west boundary of T. 20 S., R. 9 W. (CS 53/66-68)

In 1974, Douglas County Surveyor's Office rehabilitated the 1/4 cor. of secs. 17 and 20, T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

(CS 56/49-3)

In 1977, Douglas County Surveyor's Office rehabilitated the cor. of secs. 1, 2, 11, and 12, T. 20 S., R. 10 W. (CS 59/31-20)

In 1977, Douglas County Surveyor's Office rehabilitated the 1/4 cor. of secs. 7 and 8, T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

(CS 59/34-12)

In 1979, Ronald E. Stuntzner, PLS No. 1342, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 10 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 26. (M 81-42)

In 1982, Les Roberts, PLS No. 1039, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 30. (M 90-28)

In 1982, Les Roberts, PLS No. 1039, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 21. (M 90-31)

In 1982, Les Roberts, PLS No. 1039, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 20. (M 90-33)

In 1983, Les Roberts, PLS No. 1039, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 15. (M 93-63)

In 1983, Stephen Loy Swinehart, PLS No. 2013, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W. (M 94-77)

In 1983, Les Roberts, PLS No. 1039, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 28. (M 95-23)

In 1983, Les Roberts, PLS No. 1039, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 19. (M 95-24)

In 1983, Stephen Loy Swinehart, PLS No. 2013, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 16. (M 95-53)

In 1984, Les Roberts, PLS No. 1039, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W.

(CS 58/237-2)

In 1990, Harvey Wilcox, PLS No. 2244, rehabilitated the cor. of secs. 23, 24, 25, and 26, T. 20 S., R. 10 W.

(CS 63/104-22)

In 2019, Tony Hostetter, PLS No. 1975, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 16. (CS 65/103-13)

In 2021, Jerry Lee Estabrook, PLS No. 2703, resurveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W. (M 179-43)

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A: Attachment A 2 | Page

In 2021, Jerry Lee Estabrook, PLS No. 2703, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 10 W., and surveyed certain private lots in secs. 11 and 14. (M 180-12)

In 2021, Jerry Lee Estabrook, PLS No. 2703, resurveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 7. (M 180-35)

In 2024, Stephan R. Stys, PLS No. 86454, resurveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 10 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 24. (M 184-18)

BLM Administrative Surveys Available at Coos Bay District Office

Note: Administrative Surveys are not a Federal authority survey nor are they a state authority survey.

They are a “no authority” survey. These surveys were conducted in support of timber harvests many decades ago. As time has passed, some local surveyors (non-BLM Professional Land Surveyors) have utilized or rejected monuments established in these administrative surveys. These PLS’s utilize these monuments at their own risk.

In date unknown, Herman Walitalo calculated, and may have surveyed, a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and subdivision-of-survey lines in sec. 20.

In date unknown, Herman Walitalo calculated, and may have surveyed, a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and subdivision-of-survey lines in sec. 30.

In 1965, Bill Mullohan (BLM) and Mike Klein (USFS) resurveyed a portion of the boundary between Tps. 20 S., Rs. 9 and 10 W., a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 9 W., and surveyed certain private lots in sec. 7.

In 1964-66, BLM and International Paper Company resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 10 W., and surveyed certain private lots in secs. 11 and 27.

In 1972, Forrest J. Hales, PLS No. 453, resurveyed a portion of the subdivisional lines of T. 20 S., R. 10 W.

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A: Attachment A 3 | Page

1953-54 Tillman & Gawron BLM

1974 DCSO

1982 Wofford BLM 1982 Roberts PLS (M 90-28)

1982 Roberts PLS (M 90-31) 1982 Roberts PLS (M 90-33) 1983 Roberts PLS (M 95-23) 1983 Roberts PLS (M 95-24)

1983 Swinehart PLS 1984 Roberts PLS 2006-09 Forkner BLM 2019 Hostetter PLS

2024 Stys

2026 BLM

planned

T. 20 S, R. 9 W.

secs. 19 and 20

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A: Attachment A 4 | Page

1951-52 Tillman BLM 1965-66 admin BLM and IPC

1977 DCSO

2021 Estabrook PLS 2024 Stys PLS 2026 BLM planned

T. 20 S, R. 10 W.

secs. 12 and 13

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A: Attachment A 5 | Page

1921-22 Mensch GLO

1965 admin BLM and USFS

1968 DCSO

1977 DCSO

2006-09 Forkner BLM 2021 Estabrook PLS (M 180-12) 2021 Estabrook PLS (M 180-35)

T. 20 S, R. 10 W.

sec. 1

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A: Attachment A 6 | Page

1968 DCSO

1977 DCSO

1983 Swinehart PLS (M 94-77) 1983 Swinehart PLS (M 95-53) 2006-09 Forkner BLM

1921-22 Mensch GLO 1951-52 Tillman BLM 1953-54 Tillman and

Gawron BLM 1965 admin BLM and USFS

2019 Hostetter PLS 2021 Estabrook PLS (M 179-43) 2021 Estabrook PLS (M 180-35)

T. 20 S, R. 9 W.

secs. 7 and 8

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit A: Attachment A 7 | Page

040506

19 20

C o o n

C rk

R d g R d

Johnson

C rk

R dg

R d

Coon C rk R dg Rd

Coon Crk

Rdg Rd

W Fo rk

S m it h

R iv er R d

Fisker-Smith Rd

E Fork Spencer Crk Rd

S p e n ce r

R d g S p u r

Smith River Rd

Spencer

Crk Spur 2

C o on C rk R dg R d

Spencer Crk Spur #2

Spencer

Crk Rd

C oon

C rk

R d

W Fo rk

Smith

R iv er

Rd

Johnson Crk Rd

Legend

Survey Priority Phase

Complete

Ownership

CTCLUSI

Bureau of Land Management

Private

U.S. Forest Service

Road Paved Surface

Gravel Surface

Natural orUnknown Surface

Township and Range

1 inch = 0.5 Miles 0 0.5 10.25 Miles

Exhibit B

Mileage Phase 1: 4.4 miles Phase 2: 3.9 miles

T. 20 S, R. 9 W.

secs. 19 and 20

Desired: Priority

Phase 1

Phase 2

Previous Surveys

1982 Roberts PLS (M 90-28)

1982 Roberts PLS (M 90-33)

T. 20 S, R. 10 W.

secs. 12 and 13

Desired: Priority

Phase 1

Phase 2

Previous Surveys

2021 Estabrook PLS (M 180-12)

T. 20 S, R. 10 W.

sec. 1

Desired: Priority

Phase 1

Phase 2

Previous Surveys

1951-52 Tillman BLM

1968 DCSO

2021 Estabrook PLS (M 180-12)

2021 Estabrook PLS (M 180-35)

New Survey Required line to run

T. 20 S, R. 9 W.

secs. 7 and 8

Desired: Priority

Phase 1

Phase 2

Previous Surveys 1951-52 Tillman BLM 1953-54 Tillman and Gawron BLM 1965 admin BLM and USFS

1977 DCSO (CS 59/34-12)

2019 Hostetter PLS (CS 65/103-13) 2021 Estabrook PLS (M 180-35)

New Survey Required line to run corner to establish

ITEM ITEM NAME QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE EXTENSION

Phase 1 Survey - blazing, posting, and flagging 4.4 miles of property boundary; re-establishing 15 corners

4.4 Mile

Phase 2 Survey - blazing, posting, and flagging 3.9 miles of property boundary; establish four corners;

and re-establish 12 corners

3.9 Mile

Company Name

Authorized Signer Name, Title (Print)

Signature

Date

The Contractor shall provide all labor, materials, tools, equipment, transportation, supplies, and incidentals required to complete the Scope of Work described in Exhibit A. Any resources required to complete the work as described but not specifically detailed in one of the items listed on the quote form shall be considered incidental to the listed items.

Exhibit C: Lower Smith River Boundary Surveys - Bid Form

GRAND TOTAL - QUOTE

The Contractor further declares that they have carefully examined the Request for Quotes and all other Contract Documents, hereinafter referred to as the Document, is satisfied as to the conditions of and the work involved. This Quote is made in accordance with the provisions and the terms of the Contract and included in the Document.

RFQ - Lower Smith River Property Boundary Surveys - Exhibit C 1 | Page